Commons talk:File types

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 180 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.


Any priority for Google Summer of Code projects?[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation is planning to participate again at Google Summer of Code. There is a discussion about proposing projects to support x3d or KML in Commons. What about having a catch-all entry for unsupported file types in Commons/MediaWiki? We could explicitly point to KML, x3d and link to the full list here. Are there other formats that we should highlight to potential GSOC students? Also if you want to volunteer as mentor that would be great.--Qgil (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

See COM:UNSUPPORTED and its companion bug bugzilla:42725 − all formats there have been discussed before (I can try to dig the Village Pump discussions if needed).
I think there is a strong case for Raw image format (DNG) − bugzilla:19153 ; and I suppose Wikisource folks might be super interested in a ePub format − better check with them first if it is still needed.
Jean-Fred (talk) 14:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I misread your post − I thought you meant a catch all entry here or on bugzilla, not for the GSOC. Sory for the confusion. Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

VP8 now patent encumbered[edit]

Press release

Now Google has licensed for MPEG LA patents for their use in VP8 it's no longer free in the sense of being unencumbered by patents. It's still royalty free, though the precise license terms for sublicensees are unavailable: [1]. But that's the same as h.264 which is free for non-commercial use, but not used here because of patents. It may be subject to further licensing requirements, or even be banned, as Nokia are suing HTC over VP8 in Europe:[2][3].

The question is does anything need to be done about this? I would prefer it if the policy were able to support patent encumbered but free formats, especially h.264. But if that's not possible then should the use of VP8 be re-examined? --JohnBlackburne (talk) 20:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

It seems that encumbrance hasn't been confirmed yet? Check w:JPEG#Patent_issues. If you have FUD, you can keep the originals and upload also Theora versions.
Free for noncommercial use is not enough.
--AVRS (talk) 09:07, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
At least we should wait until "We anticipate having the terms of our sublicense ready in the next few weeks. When those terms are ready we will blog about them here, so watch this space." [Quote from 1] --McZusatz (talk) 18:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Here's what looks like a draft agreement: [4]. Not sure when it went up as it's undated and I've just noticed it. There's also a FAQ [5]. Quite interesting and unlike typical open source licenses.--JohnBlackburne (talk) 22:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

SWF not generatable with free tools?[edit]

This is incorrect: there's Flex. This was created by Adobe, initially as a paid product but for most of its life as an Adobe product it was free. But recently Adobe handed it to Apache, and it is now available from them under the Apache License [6]. Flex being command line is not everyone's first choice for making Flash/SWF/AIR content but that's a user preference, not a limitation of the software which supports all Flash/SWF/AIR features.--JohnBlackburne (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say it is not generatable at all. I mean not all SWF files are playable with free software; not sure about generation. --AVRS (talk) 19:25, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Is it recommended to convert TIFF files to PNG?[edit]

My understanding is that they're both lossless, so a conversion should be lossless as well, right? If PNG is preferred over TIFF, then would it make sense to recommend conversion in the guideline? Curly Turkey (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

TIFF files can contain metadata and multipage documents. If none of this applies to the files, PNG is preferred. --McZusatz (talk) 22:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
PNG can also have much of the metadata that Tiff files can. The lossless compression algorithm used by PNGs often results in smaller sizes then the compression (or lack thereof) often used by Tiff files. On the other hand tiff is favoured by some archive folks, and they have tools that work with tiff (I guess). When you upload a tiff file to commons the thumbnails are pngs, so might as well just keep the format the same as whatever format the file is originally in. Bawolff (talk) 05:30, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
No, thumbnails are not displayed as PNGs. They are displayed as JPEGs. I checked. And that's actually the reason I say you shouldn't change them. TIFFs allow us to do something PNGs don't, having a lossless archive copy while using allowing lossy compression for download. For photographs, the difference is extremely large.
One thing you can do, though (assuming the file isn't mirroring some other file) is optimize the compression. There seem to be a lot of TIFFs that are completely uncompressed. I wouldn't do this for no reason, but if you are editing the file, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't. I personally recommend running the edited file through FileOptimizer before uploading. (To keep the metadata, make sure keep metadata is enabled in the JPEG tab of the options.) Trlkly (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry you're right, not sure what I was thinking. Default is JPEG. It is actually possible to request a png thumbnail using the lossy=0 parameter. ::::Compare:
JPEG thumb vs PNG thumb.
Bawolff (talk) 22:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Too bad that doesn't work for other types of files. It'd be fun to use lossy=1 to make a large PNG render as a JPEG. Trlkly (talk) 01:30, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
{{Compressed version}} apparently doesn't care about the achive format, you could use it also for lossy JPEG thumbnails of PNG images. BTW, I "think" (please correct me) that TIFF compression can be lossy (and actually permits JPEG), that could be a very bad idea for {{LargeTIFF}} or similar archived versions. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

RFC to Allow MP4[edit]

Just a heads up, there's a discussion at Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video to allow MP4 video (A patented format that is currently disallowed on that basis) on Wikimedia. Its a complex issue (in my opinion anyways), and I encourage everyone to read the RFC and comment about how they feel. Bawolff (talk) 05:22, 16 January 2014 (UTC)