Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
NAPLPS

North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax

image/naplps
VS

GIMP Image Format

image/x-xcf
XCF

A complete technical comparison of North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax and GIMP Image Format — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature NAPLPS XCF
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No Yes
Animation Support Yes Yes
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support ✕ No Yes
EXIF Metadata ✕ No Yes
ICC Color Profile ✕ No Yes
North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax
image/naplps
Extension
.nap.naplps
Container NAPLPS Byte Stream
Compression Uncompressed (Tokenized ASCII Commands)
Algorithm
None (Coordinate encoding)
Color Depth 16-color palette (Indexed from larger color spaces)
Developed by ANSI / CSA (Based on Canadian CRC's Telidon)
Released 1983
Magic Bytes
1B (Variable / ESC sequences)
Full NAPLPS reference →
GIMP Image Format
image/x-xcf
Extension
.xcf
Container GIMP Hierarchical Chunk Container
Compression None / RLE (Run-Length Encoding) / Zlib / Deflate (In newer GIMP versions)
Algorithm
NoneRLEZlib
Color Depth 8-bit per channel, 16-bit per channel, 32-bit floating point
Developed by Spencer Kimball, Peter Mattis, and the GIMP Development Team
Released 1995
Magic Bytes
67 69 6D 70 20 78 63 66
Full XCF reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser NAPLPS XCF
Chrome Chrome
✕ ✕
Firefox Firefox
✕ ✕
Safari Safari
✕ ✕
Edge Edge
✕ ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
NAPLPS

NAPLPS Strengths

  • Extremely bandwidth-efficient, enabling colorful graphical interfaces over early 300 baud dial-up connections
  • Resolution-independent vector scaling allowed the exact same file to be displayed accurately on varied early PC monitors and television sets
Limitations
  • Completely obsolete and unsupported by modern web technologies
  • Relies heavily on stateful parsing and terminal emulators rather than straightforward file decoding
  • Easily misidentified by MIME sniffers as plain text or generic binary streams due to the lack of a standardized file header
XCF

XCF Strengths

  • Preserves all non-destructive editing elements, layer hierarchies, masks, and alpha channels across GIMP sessions
  • Open and thoroughly documented specification within the open-source community, allowing third-party tools like Krita and ImageMagick to read project files
  • Reliable magic byte header prevents misidentification
Limitations
  • Massive file sizes because raw, unflattened layer bitmaps and masks are stored directly within the project archive
  • Completely proprietary to the GIMP ecosystem for deep editing; cannot be natively rendered or parsed by web browsers
  • Third-party software supporting XCF may occasionally struggle to render complex text layer adjustments or advanced layer blend modes identically to GIMP

When to choose which format

NAPLPS
Use NAPLPS when…
  • 1980s Videotex Services
  • Prodigy Online Service Graphics
  • Historical BBS Terminal Graphics
  • Legacy Teletext Broadcasts
XCF
Use XCF when…
  • GIMP Native Project Archival
  • Layered Photo Editing and Graphic Design
  • Intermediary Asset Preparation for Export

More comparisons

NAPLPS vs ACES → XCF vs ACES → NAPLPS vs APNG → XCF vs APNG → NAPLPS vs AVCI → XCF vs AVCI → NAPLPS vs AVCS → XCF vs AVCS → NAPLPS vs AVIF → XCF vs AVIF → All comparisons →
Share this comparison