Text w/Transparent Background

AF
Posted By
Allen Flick
Nov 8, 2004
Views
668
Replies
22
Status
Closed
Something tells me this is so easy that I’ll be laughed at, but be that as it may ’cause I’m an extreme newbie.

I want to create a textual jpeg that I can place at various spots on my web page and have the background be seen through the text. I chose at some point "Transparent" but it doesn’t seem to do any- thing.

How is this done?

Thanks for your help.

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

MJ
Monty Jake Monty
Nov 8, 2004
JPG’s do not support transparency. Save as a GIF or PNG.

Steve

— faith \’fath\ n : firm belief in something for which there is no proof. Webster’s Dictionary

From: Allen Flick
Organization: Alumni – University of Texas at Dallas
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 20:47:27 GMT
Subject: Text w/Transparent Background

Something tells me this is so easy that I’ll be laughed at, but be that as it may ’cause I’m an extreme newbie.

I want to create a textual jpeg that I can place at various spots on my web page and have the background be seen through the text. I chose at some point "Transparent" but it doesn’t seem to do any- thing.

How is this done?

Thanks for your help.

T
tacitr
Nov 8, 2004
I want to create a textual jpeg that I can place at various spots on my web page and have the background be seen through the text.

Step 1: You can’t. The JPEG file format does not allow transparency; you can’t make a transparent JPEG.

Instead, create your text, then use File->Save for Web to make a transparent GIF.


Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
N2
November08.2004
Nov 8, 2004
in article , Allen Flick at
wrote on 11/08/2004 12:47 PM:

I want to create a textual jpeg that I can place at various spots on my web page and have the background be seen through the text.

JPG does not do that.
S
sdft
Nov 8, 2004
i think he wants partial transparent text so the background can be seen through the text.

is this the same sort of thing?

i know about making transparent gifs but thats just the bit around the image as far as i know.. can you make the image itself partially transparent?
T
tacitr
Nov 8, 2004
i think he wants partial transparent text so the background can be seen through the text.

is this the same sort of thing?

Yes. JPEG does not support transparency or translucency of any sort in any way whatsoever; every pixel in a JPEG is always 100% opaque.

i know about making transparent gifs but thats just the bit around the image as far as i know.. can you make the image itself partially transparent?

No. GIF transparency is "all or nothing;" a pixel can not be partly transparent or translucent.

PNG supports translucency, Problem is, PNG translucency is not supported by Internet Explorer, and is supported to varing degress and with varying success by other browsers. In short, it won’t work for most of the browsing public.

Best solution: Fake it. Build the background of the Web site into the image. If you can’t do that, it’s time to re-think the Web site design.


Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
N2
November08.2004
Nov 9, 2004
in article KvTjd.256$
wrote on 11/08/2004 3:42 PM:

i think he wants partial transparent text so the background can be seen through the text.

is this the same sort of thing?

i know about making transparent gifs but thats just the bit around the image as far as i know.. can you make the image itself partially transparent?

You will have to save the background with the foreground. It will all have to be one image, background and Translucent letters.
E
edjh
Nov 9, 2004
sdft wrote:
i think he wants partial transparent text so the background can be seen through the text.

is this the same sort of thing?

i know about making transparent gifs but thats just the bit around the image as far as i know.. can you make the image itself partially transparent?
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/lucyinthesky.html


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
A7
aka 717
Nov 9, 2004
"Tacit" wrote in message
i think he wants partial transparent text so the background can be seen through the text.

is this the same sort of thing?

Yes. JPEG does not support transparency or translucency of any sort in any way
whatsoever; every pixel in a JPEG is always 100% opaque.
i know about making transparent gifs but thats just the bit around the image
as far as i know.. can you make the image itself partially transparent?

No. GIF transparency is "all or nothing;" a pixel can not be partly transparent
or translucent.

PNG supports translucency, Problem is, PNG translucency is not supported by
Internet Explorer, and is supported to varing degress and with varying success
by other browsers. In short, it won’t work for most of the browsing public.

Best solution: Fake it. Build the background of the Web site into the image. If
you can’t do that, it’s time to re-think the Web site design.

Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Actually it is the browsers that don’t support transparency channels, isn’t it? In Jpegs I mean? Or does GIF and Ping have a way of indicating which color is transparent?
G
Gadgets
Nov 9, 2004
jpgs in a web page can be made partially transparent with IE’s filter:opacity, but it would apply to the whole pic, not part of it. Other browsers would show it 100% opaque.

Cheers, Jason (remove … to reply)
Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com
T
tacitr
Nov 9, 2004
Actually it is the browsers that don’t support transparency channels, isn’t it? In Jpegs I mean?

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and does not support transparency.

Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
A7
aka 717
Nov 12, 2004
"Tacit" wrote in message
Actually it is the browsers that don’t support transparency channels, isn’t it? In Jpegs I mean?

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and
does not support transparency.

Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

It would be pretty simple though for a browser to
read one color level and make it transparent.
A7
aka 717
Nov 12, 2004
"Tacit" wrote in message
Actually it is the browsers that don’t support transparency channels, isn’t it? In Jpegs I mean?

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and
does not support transparency.

Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

It’s like a video editor with blue screen. You pick the color you want made transparent and the file can be jpeg, mpeg, gif, or anything else.
J
jjs
Nov 12, 2004
"aka 717" wrote in message
"Tacit" wrote in message
Actually it is the browsers that don’t support transparency channels, isn’t it? In Jpegs I mean?

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and
does not support transparency.

It would be pretty simple though for a browser to
read one color level and make it transparent.

Look into the Alpha filter and other filters for Explorer.
T
tacitr
Nov 12, 2004
It’s like a video editor with blue screen. You pick the color you want made transparent and the file can be jpeg, mpeg, gif, or anything else.

Then the browser would have to do a significant amount of client-side image processing; and besides, how would you tell the browser to make the image transparent, and what color to use?


Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
J
jjs
Nov 12, 2004
"Tacit" wrote in message
It’s like a video editor with blue screen. You pick the color you want made transparent and the file can be jpeg, mpeg, gif, or anything else.

Then the browser would have to do a significant amount of client-side image
processing; and besides, how would you tell the browser to make the image transparent, and what color to use?

It is already possible in Explorer by using their filters. If you like, I can post some examples.
A7
aka 717
Nov 12, 2004
"Tacit" wrote in message
It’s like a video editor with blue screen. You pick the color you want made transparent and the file can be jpeg, mpeg, gif, or anything else.

Then the browser would have to do a significant amount of client-side image
processing; and besides, how would you tell the browser to make the image transparent, and what color to use?


Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Isn’t it all client side anyway? It would be a lot
more overhead, though. I guess I just don’t
understand how the gifs are processed without
having something done in the plugin or client
side browser.
J
jjs
Nov 12, 2004
"aka 717" wrote in message

Isn’t it all client side anyway? It would be a lot
more overhead, though. I guess I just don’t
understand how the gifs are processed without
having something done in the plugin or client
side browser.

Hey, all the fancy stuff can already be done for Explorer-only views. You have probably seen them and not even known it.

Sure, it is client-side and the overhead is not significant. In fact, in some cases modifying the image at the client is much faster than sending an equivalent picture. For example, I can have a page that is graduated colors of _any_ size and there is almost zero network overhead. Very fast. You see, all your bringing over the net is the instruction to make the gradation, and not the pixels neccessary for showing the same with a picture. Same with many Explorer-only filters. (See – Explorer only.)

If I were at work, I’d post some examples working with pictures, but I am not. Next week I can post examples. Or you could search the Micro$oft site looking for "filters and transitions".
A7
aka 717
Nov 13, 2004
"jjs" wrote in message
"aka 717" wrote in message

Isn’t it all client side anyway? It would be a lot
more overhead, though. I guess I just don’t
understand how the gifs are processed without
having something done in the plugin or client
side browser.

Hey, all the fancy stuff can already be done for Explorer-only views. You have probably seen them and not even known it.

Sure, it is client-side and the overhead is not significant. In fact, in some cases modifying the image at the client is much faster than sending an equivalent picture. For example, I can have a page that is graduated colors of _any_ size and there is almost zero network overhead. Very fast. You see, all your bringing over the net is the instruction to make the gradation, and not the pixels neccessary for showing the same with a picture. Same with many Explorer-only filters. (See – Explorer only.)
If I were at work, I’d post some examples working with pictures, but I am not. Next week I can post examples. Or you could search the Micro$oft site looking for "filters and transitions".

Cool. I’d like to see some examples, if you feel like it. No emergency. What then is the advantage of say, GIF
transparency built in to the file format, if any?
J
jjs
Nov 13, 2004
"aka 717" wrote in message
Cool. I’d like to see some examples, if you feel like it. No emergency. What then is the advantage of say, GIF
transparency built in to the file format, if any?

The advantage is that a properly done transparent GIF works on any competent browser.
T
tacitr
Nov 14, 2004
What then is the advantage of say, GIF
transparency built in to the file format, if any?

It works in any browser

It works in any program that can read a GIF

It works the same way in all browsers

Each programmer who makes a program capable of browsing (or displaying images of any sort) does not need to write his own code to do it

It’s standardized across all programs that can make a GIF

The person creating the GIF knows what it’ll looklike in the browser

Tgere is no need to do any funky, non-standard stuff to tell the browser what to make transparent and what to keep opaque when the Web page is coded —
Art, literature, shareware, polyamory, kink, and more:
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
P
Pete
Nov 14, 2004
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:31:34 -0800, aka 717 wrote:

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and
does not support transparency.

It would be pretty simple though for a browser to
read one color level and make it transparent.

Not so easy with JPEG files, because compression introduces artifacts that will affect the shape of areas that originally had your transparency color.
A7
aka 717
Nov 15, 2004
"Pete" wrote in message
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:31:34 -0800, aka 717 wrote:

No. It’s part of the JPEG file format specification: JPEG does not allow and
does not support transparency.

It would be pretty simple though for a browser to
read one color level and make it transparent.

Not so easy with JPEG files, because compression introduces artifacts that will affect the shape of areas that originally had your transparency color.

Good point. It would have to be a mask in a seperate layer maybe which might not compress so much if lossless. I
learn something new every few days.
: -)

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections