hi,
yes, filters "broke" the important property of scalability of vector
graphics.
This has been around since flash 8.
But surprisingly, your (justified) request is quite rare.
Some hints:
- ask Adobe to add a "scale with movieClip" checkbox in filter params
(almost hopeless)
- set up the filters using programming, and make the pixel params
scale-dependant (not very easy, because reproducing IDE filters using
ationscript is complicated by differences in parameter names) (EDIT: try
googling to find some tool or JSFL generating this actionscript for you)
- ask your designer to duplicate the layout and apply a scale factor "by
hand" to pixel distances in filter parameters. (easiest)
If you can't edit the source file, Glen Pike s' bitmap is the only
solution I see.
Normally, wrapping the filtered clip in another clip doesn't change
anything.
Olivier
Andrew Sinning a écrit :
We've build an interface for a 512x384 movie using an external skin
movie built at 1024x768. We've actually been doing this for a number
of years, but now that we're trying to improve the quality of our art,
I'm noticing something for the first time. When the imported movie is
scaled down, the filters become exaggerated. My take on this is that
the pixel values specified in the filters are relative to the root
clip, not relative to the clip on which they are applied. This
effectively doubles the effect of the filter when the clip is scaled
down.
Is there a work around?
Thanks!
--
Olivier Besson (gludion) - (33 1) 44 64 78 99
http://www.gludion.com
http://blog.gludion.com
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
