on 6/18/01 10:56 AM, Colin Holgate at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> One thing is for sure, Flash does better JPEG rendering than
> Director, so if your slides were suited to JPEG compression, you
> would be better off using Flash. Having said that, the Flash movie
> could be a sprite in shockwave, if there's a reason for it to be done
> in Director. In particular, JPEG scales better in Flash, and looks a
> lot better if you happen to be in 8 bit color than JPEG compressed
> bitmaps do. Both of those advantages still hold true for a Flash
> member in shockwave.
>
I am doing a D8.5 Win & Mac CD project where one of the purposes is to
review details of a few hundred still photos at 100% scale as well as 50%,
25%, & 12.5%. At 100% the photos are about 3000 x 2000 pixels. The user will
also be able to pan the images. The images will be jpeg compressed at a high
quality setting. Image quality is important.
Which approach will result in the best image quality:
1) import pre-compressed (JPEGs compressed in FW4 or debabilizer) images
into a Director cast for display, or
2) Use Flash & Generator/Developer to create a Flash 5 SWF for each
pre-compressed image and import these SWFs into Director.
Thanks for any advice.
Ray Broussard
http://PhotographicVR.com
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list,
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
