Why I never render PNG
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 мар 2024
- 🔽 The full playlist: Master Optimization in Blender 🔽
• Master Optimization in...
The article that sparked the video 👉 skientia.co/cgi/image-formats...
Downloadable image of the decision tree 👉 1drv.ms/i/s!AuLCSE-VGaTGgY0hf... 
Кино
A few amendments to the video. Thanks commenters for pointing this out.
1. The PNG/EXR difference comparison does not show only compression. It shows every difference between the two.
2. Often, TIFF is the preferred deliverable for print.
3. Cryptomattes ought not be lossy. Use ZIP 32-bit.
4. Bit-depth doesn't only double the amount of data; it does so for each channel. So an RGB image with double bit depth increases six-fold in precision, while only doubling in data. Good trade-off.
5. DWAA doesn't store 32-bit information, which is why the sizes are the same in the chart. (Unless the passes are named in a specific way.)
6. EXR doesn't bake in the tone-mapping. If you need that, TIFF is a good alternative to PNG.
When you say EXR doesn't bake the tone-mapping are you referring to the color transform? I don't have an AGX color transform option in Krita, so baking that in to png is the only way
@graphikeye You can use TIFF too, as it bakes transforms and its 32bit. If You still wanna use EXR, You can use build-in Krita's OpenColorIO library and set path for Blender LUTs configs, it will let You use the same configs, but only for View transform(AgX/Filmic), not Look.
For more info check out Krita docs -- Color Managed Workflow part, they mention Blender interaction here.
#4 is just... wrong!
8 bit depth = 8(r) + 8(g) + 8(b) = 24 bpp (bits per pixel)
16 bit depth = 16(r) + 16(g) + 16(b) = 48 bpp
32 bit depth = 32(r) + 32(g) + 32(b) = 96 bpp
Doubling the bit depth still only doubles the data.
@@stephen-boddy Shit, you're right. What I meant is that it increases the precision six-fold. Thanks for pointing it out. There's a lot of places to stumble on this topic.
My only problem with EXR is that there's no accurate color configuration for it in Premiere Pro, especially for Agx. Unless there's one that i don't know of.
Would love if you could share your knowledge on this.
I think the comparison at 5:00 is a bit misleading. PNG is lossless format so it should show the exact same pixel values if you're encoding the same data. The difference there is that EXR can store floating point values where PNG only stores integer values regardless of the bit depth hence the massive difference in the sky and highlights.
This makes sense in the context of rendering but there are scenarios where you don't need the data to be HDR (when creating textures typically) it would be interesting to compare how EXR and PNG compare in that scenario
Honestly, you're right on the money. It was a bit of an unfair comparison in a few ways, and I wish in hindsight that I'd shown a bit more nuance. As you say, the argument doesn't necessarily hold regarding textures. Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
@@robinsquaresW for hindsight
When you dragged that PNG in it was quite visibly darker. That looked like it was in the wrong color space to me.
@@kzone272 that's a common display error with PNG when shown in things like a browser but I find it you open it with photopea it displays correctly, as it does when loaded into a project as an asset
@@kzone272I believe that's simply due to the display transform, like how rec709 is gamma 2.2 and srgb is gamma 2.4, the EXR is also a "HDR" image, so most applications will choose to display it in HDR if your monitor supports it, I may be wrong though
Great explanation! But, regarding deliverables, one should always talk to the client, or in my case, check with the printer first. The printer told me that he prefers 16 bit TIFFs for best quality. The test prints for my upcoming exhibition are looking gorgeous, btw. 😎
Oh, absolutely. Honestly, I just forgot to mention print. It's such a small part of my work these days. I'll pin your comment.
Save it as tiff at the end. Rendering tiffs will just fill your drive.
@@jhalanddesign I usually go EXR and export what I need in post.
@@robinsquaresWheres the Pin LUL
I was thinking something similar with TIFFs. I switched over a few months ago and I've noticed a nice quality bump with some of my renders since.
0:55 is misleading. Bit depth refers to the precision with which the SAME image/video is stored. Storing values beyond "white" has nothing to do with the number of bits. You can do that in 8 bits or any number of bits.
Also, saying that 8, 16 and 32 bits "double" the amount of data is strange since we are talking about precision. A 16bit PNG has 256 times more possible values per channel than 8bit. It's not just 2x as precise. This explains much better why 16bit is fine in almost all cases - and why some industries work with 10 or 12 bits - because 16 or 32 bit is unnecessarily precise.
3:20 He confuses HDR with lossless. PNG is lossless meaning an encoded image can be decoded into the exact same data. He actually means HDR again (storing values beyond white). But PNGs are also often used for that.
5:00 For whatever reason he is comparing a HDR file with a non-HDR file. Even if he thinks these files store the same data, the comparison doesn't make sense since two lossless files with the same precision obviously should contain identical pixel values - assuming you encode and decode the data correctly. Strange "proofs".
you are awesome
So is that what he says completely wrong, or are his arguments still valid?
@@sebastiengorecki4254 im wondering the same
I find this comment more valid than the entire video!
@@sebastiengorecki4254 I would lean towards "wrong".
Your comparison between the EXR and PNG isn't showing the difference in compression quality. PNG exports with SDR tonemapping, whereas EXR export are linear unclipped HDR data. This means you will see a big difference in the brighter areas, which are squashed down when doing SDR tonemapping. You should have exported the PNG with linear tonemapping and clipped the EXR to a max of 1.0 to get a perfect comparison.
You're absolutely right. That would've been a more fair comparison. But the HDR/SDR difference is one that I feel is relevant and that I wanted to show. But you're right; it definitely doesn't show compression alone. I wouldn't say that breaks the core argument though.
Linearly encoded PNG is still integer and "SDR". Unusable regardless of the encoding, not to mention its inapt "alpha" encoding.
It's hard to find channels that provide actual information these days. I get why clickbait-y titles are needed but most of the popular Blender youtubers are just pumping videos filled with memes that give little to no info about the topic they are supposed to be on. So it was refreshing to see a video that provides knowledge. Great video!
Learning about DWAA EXRs a few years ago blew my mind. Why this didn't become the gold standard for decently compressed high quality outputs IMMEDIATELY is just mind boggling to me. We've had this format for so long and it's been practically ignored for like half its existence.
Amazingly well laid out, thank you. I have been using .png since my photography days, so this is a game changer for me!
The reason jpeg is smaller is because you loose a lot of information about the Hue even if your setting is acceptable for your eyes that are better at detecting contrasts. If you do professional work please use png as it correctly stores the result of your render, jpeg does not and it would show as soon as you start doing color corections. For your delivery still use png as it's the most accurate output you can give too. If you don't know if you need lossless, you do. Always. As for the test shown with the difference layer on a png, what it was is the color space change. If someone needs a smaller size he can always convert the images. If the goal is to convert the images to video at some point you would have double compression on jpg. Stick to 16bit png for work and delivering with 8bit png is fine.
Thank you for the explanation❤
the video that i needed years ago, but i'm glad it's here now
great work!
Absolutely amazing video, great source for the video, and just a great explanation!
Very much appriciate your effort. The whole series is a must See and very well done.
I find it very amusing that the slide about bit-depth had the gradient all stepped to bits both literal and figurative 😂
That was incredibly informative 😮
DUDE! i have 10 years of blender experience so i didn't learn anything new (except that win+ctrl+shift+B which blew my mind lol), but i still watched every video in this series because the explanation quality was SO high and enjoyable. i'll pass the link to this playlist to all of my students! thanks for you hard work, the community is getting so filled by literally noobs teaching everybody how to do stuff that people like you are a much needed breath of fresh hair!
Thank you so much. Comments like this make my day.
Amazing video exactly what i needed for an upcoming project :)))
Fantastic vid. Ive always used png, now i know better. Greetings from Ecuador, you've earned a sub!
That's basically a entire lesson on rendering. Nice video !
I've learned a few things... Great episode!
Watched your other videos, I really love how you explain things and very easy to understand.
For a final render, there are also the options to use WebP or create a lossy PNG with tools like pngquant.
WebP supports both lossy and lossless with or without transparency.
And tools like pngquant can reduce the size of a PNG by 70% without any practically visible artifacts.
Oh if only modern formats like .webp and .jxl were more adopted.
Good video, but comparing zoomed in JPEG and PNG should have been done without interpolation, as that defeats the purpose of the comparison.
What a great video. Literally, i've been using png for the last 8 years without knowing the real difference. Thanks.
amazing video as always
Fantastic work ❤
Wow that was amazing!! Seems like small information but huge for the quality and space!! Thank you man, you saved my life!!
great video and thank you for justifying my love for jpg
Do you also render video's with JPG?
As a consumer of a lot of online renders, I've learned that some image sharing websites will do extra compression of JPGs. That's why people "accuse" JPG of being low quality, because like it or not, a lot of places will take the opportunity to compress it "a little bit", which when the image is reshared, websites will compress it "a little bit" again. That's why terms like "Needs more JPEG" exists. Trying to do the same thing with PNG would only make the PNG load slower, but no quality reduction (though nowadays some sites seem to convert to JPG anyway). Additionally, I have one friend who does 2D art and was told to render in JPG "due to its lower quality" to try to sell the "full, proper quality" elsewhere like a patron subscription service. It's much harder to deliver a low-quality PNG than a JPG.
Thanks for sharing! I didn't know about the difference between JPG and PNG regarding (with/without) transparency. I did learn about DWAA codec, but probably didn't need 32 bit for my short 😅 good visual charts too.
This video is incredible and is going to save me so much space it isn't even funny. 🙏🙏🙏
👍🏻 Great! Informative! And all in a nutshell.
Thank you! I'll use this as a guide from now on.
All this time my only rule is that: There's no point using .PNG if it's not indexed.
Thank you for the video. Could you make a video explaining the mechanism of packing various images into one exr file? Please.
If you look real close, the whole process is shown in the video. Compositor file output.
The bg music is so soothing 😌
Hey, thanks for the In-Depth Video. Love to see more professional knowledge getting to the Blender Community.
You could have added that there is a difference between 16 bit EXR and 16 Bit png. 16bit exr is "half" float meaning that you get 32bit float values where negative colors (lower that 0) or overbrights (brighter that 255 or 1) while having half the precision. 16 bit png and tiffs only have integers values so you dont have negatives or overbrights.
In regards to png vs jpg, png gets smaller file sizes whith the amount of color represent. so a 10k image with only black and white and no greys should be much smaller than the corresponding jpg.
Kepp up the good work :)
One issue I've experienced with using exr is that when it's saved in blender, it usually doesn't look like the png file when loaded into a photo manipulation program like krita. This is usually cos of the color management (AGX or Filmic)
this is great for still images, but when i want to import an animation i am not using exr because the image doesnt look the same. I need to transform the colours with a special LUT for Agx, but i havent found one yet that correctly transforms the colours
In the comparison i think we compared 32 bit EXR file with 16 bit PNG file. This can be a reason for the difference in quality.
Btw great video, learned something new.
yes but what about the workflow, preview, editing, and so on. EXR boggled my head and i just switched to jpeg instead.
Do you have an upcoming video on working with EXR?
Great series appreciate it learn a lot :)
Damn dude, insta subscribe, howcome I haven't found you sooner. Known about this, been using EXR. I am only a hobby artist. But your explanation is clear and your video was so pleasant to watch I had to stop on 2 minute mark and make sure I subscribe.
As a photographer I have found first hand that there are images and situations that can’t be properly displayed using a 100% quality jpeg. It is simply not possible in extreme situations to have smooth gradients.
So if you are working in a colorful project I recommend you to test it in some situations.
Also, a lot of screens nowadays are 10 bit. All HDR screens are 10 bit, they have to be. But if your image is not in HDR (does blender even support that?) it might not matter.
10 bit would probably solve the Joe’s banding problem, but jpegs don’t support 10 bit.
EDIT: As others pointed out in other comments, EXR seems to support HDR andin this video HDR seems to be confused with lossless.
Robin Squares: "Why I never render PNG"
Also Robin Squares: "For deliverables I do PNG..."
Awesome stuff, please, does this apply when rendering an image sequence for a video? I've always used png, and most times the "alpha" is not necessary. Can i use jpeg at 90% quality instead?
Honestly, when I was working with 3ds max and vray I always exported exr 32bpc but now I'm using blender an I'm more than happy with the default filmic blender tone mapping 😄 it saves me a lot of time. Now I just save it as a PNG 16bpc, do slight color adjustments and it's done for my use case ✨
Thank you! It was informative and of course fun. That comparison between PNG and DXR was a bit unfair since you know that gamma curve is probably different or something.. but again, thanks!
Thank you sir!!!
Appreciate your work! One more thing, Do you think there's no such differences on saving time? I often do render animations which get me to render over 2,000-3,000 frames. Heard TIFF and EXR format save faster than PNG though. What's your thought about saving time for EXR (DWAA, 16 bit)?
You're right, EXR both saves and loads faster than PNG does. Compressing and de-compressing a file takes time, and EXR does that much more cleverly. Although bigger files can sometimes load slowly if they're on a slow hard-drive.
I did some quick preliminary tests on loading time (which I assume are comparable to saving time,) and it seemed to depend much more on bit-depth than file type. Which makes sense.
Can't tell you much more than that.
Which would be best to use as an overlay in video editing? I used to use Tiff image files, but it had its problems with giving me a white edge, so I switched over to PNG (ping) images and the white edge issue was gone!
Thank you very much!
Thanks for the video! It’s really hard to find storage for png renders but I can’t figure out how to make EXR look the same with AGX color Blender viewport render. I send it to AE and use opencolorIO but it’s not the same with png renders no matter what I do. Can you make a video about this topic?
I used to hate and avoid exr files because of the ridiculously large file size. Thanks so much for this tip!
very interesting, thank you!
What a great video!
Came for the knowledge and stayed for the soothing background music. Thanks for sharing this with us!
excellent! 🧡
thank you. I have been saying this for years, but because png is significantly slower to write than other formats due to the compression. So much so that I have had cases where it took longer to write the frame to disk, than to render it in the first place.
You're wrong about browsers only supporting 8-bit. You can use AVIF to display 10-bit HDR images, it's supported by most browsers. Also Safari supports HEIC.
JPEG can't do very slow gradients because there is quantization in YCbCr domain, which is only removed with the new JpegLi codec which no software has. You can see a similar effect in the video encoding on the chart scenes here. They show a grey ellipse with blocky borders instead of a smooth blob. Lossless EXR compression is better/faster than PNG. But it's a very complex format and only pro tools support it fully.
Short, straight to the point, no beating around the bush. Just what I needed for a video like this to improve my renders, thank you!
what about the other exr compression files? pxr24? dwab? piz? and do they affect the depth?... also nice video , i always render png and dwaa.
Edit: i mean by depth as z depth
There are some small differences between them all, but they all get the job done. I didn't want to get into the details in the video, but here's a summary.
PIZ is best for grainy images
PXR24 changes the bit depth, which can really help with size, but is slightly more confusing to work with
B44 isn't adaptive, so you get more predictable image sizes
There's little to prefer DWAA over DWAB. They compress differently sized blocks of data.
They should all handle Z-depth the same.
@@robinsquaresthanks.. i always wanted to know the difference
THANK YOUUUUUUUUUU!
Awesome series man!
even if you need transparency you can render in Jpeg the color channel and then the alpha channel separatly, since you'll usually only need alpha in compositing that's be fine too
Only thing with EXR files i noticed especially inside unity projects.. is that yes they are very small and keep amazing details, but they are also very prone to corrupting a whole project if even a single bit is not uncompressed by the program or shader it is getting loaded in ( had a hard time figuring out why a test build would use up 11 GB of VRAM as it had only the 3D cube and a 130 KB EXR texture.. it was the EXR failing to load into VRAM (switched to a 2 MB png of the same texture and the VRAM usage was 7 MB)
If that was the case, EXR wouldn't be the back-bone format of the industry and for once, a valid standard (unlike many others). The benefit of CGI offline rendering is that any frame can be re-rendered t any time, granted the pipeline is on-par with today's protocols/best conventional habits.
PNG rendering is ***never*** a rational and suitable choice.
I like dark gradient backgrounds but you must know the atrocity RUclips compression does to it, it very distracting. Anyway, great video!
Would it be better if it were white?
I guess a solid dark background would be just fine in these cases. I like dark gradients but when they are this subtle they are just banded into blobs when compressed.
@@lpcamargo I used a solid color for all the backgrounds, so I guess that's still a problem. I've heard that you can get a better bitrate in 4K?
most sophisticated clickbait title ever 👑
😂 would love the comparison in video format... My actual pipeline is:
Render in JPGs then add all in a filmstrip in a template file then render as MPEG...
Any tips/advice?
Sounds like you're doing the right thing. If you want to level up your process, use EXR instead of JPEG and Fusion (it's free) to combine it into a video file.
My blending is so god damn optimized right now, you have no idea
And yet your mouth is a sewer, so I don't think your 'blending' matters much at all. It is 3D art, and AI will soon destroy many of the jobs.
What color space are you using (agx, standard etc.) on render, and how do you set it up in davinci? There are tons of tuts about color managment but they all cover ACES
For everything photoreal, I work in AgX with a display transform that suits the scene (I typically leave it at the middle contrast level,) and export in AgX log. In Resolve, I've converted the AgX OCIO to LUTs, which I haven't had any accuracy problems with. Sometimes, I use the AgX OCIO directly in Fusion.
But the charts in my videos are typically sRGB, standard tonemapping, to retain my brand colors.
@@robinsquares Thanks for reply. You may consider making tutorial on that topic, that would be great.
non-HDR formats typically use a color space that applies a gamma function to squeeze more important color data along the bit depth. Thats why you see the colors change doing a diff check on the EXR vs PNG (lossless). DDWA and JPG compressions are very destructive even if you don't think you can see anything change. Also PNG uses zip compression per scan line, so at a point it doesn't matter how high you crank the quality slider, the compression will have a diminishing return on size and will impact load times. I personally don't see why anyone in this day in age would not use lossless, even if your image was horribly compressed blender still unpacks that image in full in memory. maybe you save a bit of time on loading time? but use a NMVe and you'll get 7GB/s transfer speeds and be laughing when your 5GB blend file loads in one second
there *MIGHT* be a math problem when you subtracted the 32 bit EXR from the 16 BIT PNG. the PNG is stored as an Integer, while the EXR is stored as FLOAT, affinity *MAY NOT* handle the changes properly and might give misleading results. I would not consider your experiment as any sort of proof, in particular since 16 bit PNG's are lossless . I think the two images are just mapped differently.
all that being said, i pretty much exclusively use EXR for everything in much the same way you do, except i use pxr24 for depth maps as the 16 bit tends to be too coarse for the things i do
also you can use alpha with jpeg2000 format, but who the heck uses that ? amrite
Great series, and this is the best episode!
How insightful and informative! Thank you for making this video! Will look at the whole series!
If nobody got me,
I know PNG got me.
Nothing can convince me to stop using PNG.
So if exr can contain multiple images does that mean you could put say, an albedo map, normal map, roughness map, and AO map in the same texture without having to pack them all into a single image? That could be pretty useful for textuees rhough idk how many game engines allow you to use exrs for environment textures as opposed to png which is compatible with almost everything
Yes, you can store different image like diffuse, AO, specular and many more in single multi-channel EXR file. But loading EXR files take much longer than formats like PNG, JPG, TGA, TIF. You can google what channels the multi-channel EXR file can contain. Hint There are more than 10 channels. And one EXR file can be larger than 100MB which is hardly possible for real-time rendering like 3D games can efficiently render without frame bump. Except your computer is super high end speed.
Nowadays there is technic to pack gray scale images into different color channels in the same file like Roughness into Red channel, Specular into Blue channel, Metalness into Green channel of PNG or JPG file. Newer version of Blender can also do this.
Making this video right when I need it gets a like. Also I appreciate not having to see Windows. (I'm aware it's most likely what you use, since Photoshop and all, but as long as I don't have to see it, I'm good.)
Even though the visual difference between a jpeg 100% and a png is not visible, when you use that image in a video game as a texture or upload it to a social media page it will get compressed again and then the artifacts start to accumulate. For me it's always png or tga because I am a game developer and compression comes at build time, but I guess for a lot of other applications it's fine, especially if you're handling srgb color information meant to be looked at by humans. Anyway I really would like you to extend that chart with some examples of png and jpeg, compressed with pingo/pings , which is the best image compression tool in existence (afaik). I like to use it's lossless png compression for my game content and in web development, though it also offers lossy compression for both.
Exr rules them all.
If you increase the dwaa compression up to 500 you can have a smaller version almost the same size as a jpg. Very good to render precomps without noise.
I want to know usability, plus movie workflow. Because everytime I have used EXR outside of HDRis for Unity, it has been a nightmare to work with.
Most the time i want a file that is easy to share and can be edited later. Storage is cheap so 16 bit png is usually fine. If i need hdr then i look at exr.
Hey, great video! I would really love to get some downloadable graphics i can reference later
Thanks! Is there a way to check my channel's community posts? I've posted the flowchart there. I'll see if I can link it in the description.
(edit: Here's a download for you 1drv.ms/i/s!AuLCSE-VGaTGgY0hfb0SI6w9ijT1dw?e=5gYyTh)
@@robinsquaresthank you! It's really great seeing a channel like yours rising like it should, I hope you continue the great work!
Is there a different way to make a rgba video other than using quicktime with png codes set to rgba? Would be nice to crush the filesize of those clips that are like 1gb for 15s
I would tell you if I knew. Honestly, I don't have enough experience with that.
As a pointer, one could refer to the DaVinci Resolve Export section of the latest documentation/manual, as the RUclips comment area isn't the most practical place for detailed or in-depth technical answers.
h265 / HVEC can support alpha channels or vp9 .webm but may not be supported by all media players. You'd need to render PNG first and then convert
Great Video!!
seeing the comparisons between PNG and JPEG, I feel like an idiot looking at my folders of PNG sequences that take up multiple gigabytes lol
I've not used PNG for sooo long now. After about a year of blender, I was tidying up my pc and realized I had 25GB OF RENDERED FILES! Definitely worth thinking about if you're serious with blender
…I could’ve saved 50 GB of space…if I knew this before..
Well then, when I get my new PC I will be keeping this in mind
Perfect explanation, amazing editing, beautiful graphic design, congratulations and thank you, this is the perfect example of what a RUclips video should be!
So the thing is, you only need PNG if you need it for something like an icon or with a transparent background, EXR for postprocessing, and for anything else, you simply use JPG. So yes, the title is not clic bait; most of the time, you don't need PNG.
But the question is How do preview your EXR frame in windows operating system. I used to with a software called DJV but unfortunately it's not working anymore.
DNEG has made their software xStudio open source. I haven't tried it myself, but people say it's nice. Other than that, Blender can obviously open EXRs. The Blender file viewer isn't bad. You can also render to both JPG and EXR to have a preview file.
incredibly interesting and helpful. Thanks a lot. The only thing which is not working for me is saving out one exr file with Multilayers. Basically i want to have the diffusion pas the ao pass the shadow catcher pass stored as layers in one exr. But it always saves out multiple exr files (per pass via output node) or one exr with only one layer which is black (without output node). Any Idea what I am doing wrong? thanks in advance and thanks again for the helpful video
I'd imagine it's mixing up the default composite output with the file output node? If there are any conflicts, it might behave weirdly. Otherwise, make sure to select "OpenEXR Multilayer" as the file type.
@@robinsquares thanks for your quick reply.
I tried all three things:
1. no changes in the compositor tab. just changing the output file to multilayer exr in the render settings
2. adding an output node with the mentioned three layers in the compositor tab (created three different exr files when set to exr which looked correctly and created one file which was completely black when set to multilayer exr)
3. saving a multilayer exr from the renderviewer (also a completely black file.)
Guess I need to dive deeper into my settings, thought I understood how it is working but it seems like I am wrong. :D
@@robinsquares seems like photohop is not able to open exr multilayer by default. There is an plugin calles EXR IO whcih is supposed to allow photoshop to open up exr multilayer files. Unfortunately it seems like the Plugin is not compatible with my version of Photoshop atm. Need to further investigate. Thought i share this information for anyone wondering.
Amazing
How can I solve the linear problem? When I import the EXR into PHOTOSHOP, several colors are modified and it becomes more saturated and bright
Thanks, I had no idea that EXR existed but my file size is way smaller now!
The problem with EXR is that you can't apply the view transforms in blender like AgX or Filmic otherwise I would always use it. The standard view transform in blender which it uses is quite ugly
If you're bringing it out of Blender and don't have a workflow for getting the same colors, I feel you. TIFF is a good alternative for you
@@robinsquaresplease make a tutorial for agx in affinity/photoshop. My colors are always way off, I've tried creating luts and such, but no success...
"oh i get it... well i guess EXR is only useful if you actually work professionally as aaaaAAAAAAAA DWAA DOES W H A T ! ?"
My problem with EXR is that the export is in completely different contrast and colors than what the vieweport shows me. I understand that EXR carries a greater depth of color but honestly, I don't have the time and I'm tired of having to adjust contrast and complexly recolor every export.
NB. If you need to use after effects, the reading time of exr is horrible. I mainly use dwaa, but sometimes I have to use png if I want quick iterations on simple graphics in AE. I hate that the exr is so badly optimized so hopefully adobe fix that in near future.
Adobe software are notoriously known from being unsuitable (and flawed) for CGI post. TIFF is to thoughtfully consider as the next choice where/when EXR isn't suitable in those edge cases.
I feel the only reason I use png is to see the thumbnail while it renders.. having to open EXRs every time is a huge pain..
Outside that, Ill change my default settings now thanks!