dcsimg
A Flash Developer Resource Site

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Another Utopian Dream? Scalable Raster Output

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    117

    Another Utopian Dream? Scalable Raster Output

    I've fallen totally in love with the raster output, but my Flash sites are set to display in different sized browsers, obviously not a problem scaling vectors. But rasters is bitmaps! Is there a way to make the bitmap output...scalable for 640x480, 800x600, and 1024x768?

    Or am I going to be creating a separate file and loadmovie'ing 3 different versions based on a Stage.height and Stage.width check? That gets ugly when there are buttons and ticker components and other non-visual foodstuffs...not to mention filesize/loadtimes.

    I don't want to fall too much more in love with Swift bitmaps if there's not much hope at a simple scaling answer...

    The answer is...no.

    Yes?

    (wow vBulletin has toruses: )

    Shawn

  2. #2
    ism BlinkOk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    , location, location
    Posts
    5,002
    I think the answer is no, it's the nature of bitmaps. have you tried storing the bitmap at it's maximum resolution and letting flash resize it?
    Graphics Attract, Motion Engages, Gameplay Addicts
    XP Pro | P4 2.8Ghz | 2Gb | 80Gb,40Gb | 128Mb DDR ATI Radeon 9800 Pro

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    117
    Ya, but my background is painting and photography, so even at max quality and no compression in MX, those jaggies drive me crazy.

    I guess the answer is either to abort and keep the rastors for ads and html based stuff, or add a resCheck function and separate those areas in the Flash movie into loadMovies with the right size for the res, and make sure the windows they open in are non-resizable through javascript in the getURL. That doesn't even take into account button and other functionality, which technically probably isn't much of a problem (invisible buttons and a few layers here and there for components) but is just a pain in the butt.

    Might be a big McFlop.

    Thanks for you help, BlinkOk

    Shawn

  4. #4
    supervillain gerbick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    undecided.
    Posts
    18,978
    why not lock the size of your movie? I mean, even though I run 1600x1200, I never run full screen.

    with a site that embeds photographs into a flash file, I'd truly suggest that you lock the movie if you can.

    [ Hello ] | [ gerbick ] | [ Ω ]

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    117
    Not sure I know what you mean. I make the movie open in a new window through javascript, non-resizable so it is always the correct dimensions. I set the html in Flash to 100%, and I make the size of the window itself dependant on 640x480, sized-up for 800x600, and sized-up again for 1024x768.

    I'm going to impliment an automatic 'detect-and-redirect', but right now I'm just 'detecting' and giving users the choice to open with a small, medium, or large window, and highlighting the right sized based on the results of sniffing out their current window size.

    What do you mean by 'locked'? If you mean non-resizable window, I already do that.

    I'm curious now...

    Shawn

  6. #6
    supervillain gerbick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    undecided.
    Posts
    18,978
    locked, as in that it will not resize. if you don't resize the image, then you should experience no jaggies whatsoever.

    or, if you were to do what somebody else mentioned earlier, and resized from the maximum down - btw, in only increments of 25%, especially given the fact pixels are indeed square, so that makes sense to take it down by 1/4th's, what not - and do that.

    I just don't see how you're experiencing jaggies, unless you are not keeping the aspect ratio/size of the image and flash file, the same, and not resizable.

    [ Hello ] | [ gerbick ] | [ Ω ]

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    117
    Well, that said, I think it's time to experiment with jpeg's in Flash. I'll do some work this weekend and get back. Probably been thinking about it too much myself, and thinking that a resized image is gonna look like crap (as it usually does outside Flash) without the consideration that the image is being housed in the Flash environment in the first place.

    640 is not 1/2 half of 1024, and nor is 800 a 25 or 50%er (i.e., 25, 50, 150, 200, etc.), so I've been thinking that if I'm downsizing based on 1024, I'll be doing so at weird percentages.

    Definitely have to play more, think less for a bit.

    Thanks

    Shawn

  8. #8
    supervillain gerbick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    undecided.
    Posts
    18,978
    exactly. you have to look at the fact that those are just ratios... different ones at that.

    I'd design around the pixel limitations, and go from there... being approximate is better than being jaggie, you think?

    [ Hello ] | [ gerbick ] | [ Ω ]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center