well, we were vectorizing b&w scans of line/text documents, so it worked quite 
well. Vectorizing pictures of your kids, on the other hand, probably wouldn't 
turn out as nicely.

michael

On Sep 1, 2011, at 12:35 PM, filip sound wrote:

> uhm, vectorizing bitmap images sounds horrible to me :)
> 
> from my experience with pdf2swf I can give the following advice
> concerning filesize:
> 
> - make sure all fonts are embedded in the pdf, otherwise all chars are
> converted to vector graphics which causes a major increase in filesize
> 
> - complex vector objects (like illustrator images) can be very heavy
> and also cause the magazine player (whatever it might be) to slowdown
> because of all the vector calculations
> 
> - resolution and size of input: preprocess the input pdf files;
> publishers for example deliver them with 300dpi but for magazine
> players in a browser you wont need more than 110dpi - tho afaik
> pdf2swf is downsampling them but I'm not sure how efficient it does
> this
> 
> - you never know how many pages your magazines will have thus I
> recommend using a clever preloader like loading only the next couple
> of pages, on jumps load the next and the previous pages, stop loading
> if a video is played and so on. keep the users experience at a
> maximum.
> 
> - all this has already been done several times by others. the best (as
> in most complete and crazy features like grouping and animating
> objects from generated SWFs, all kinds of media imports, export to CD
> version, web zip, ipad, iphone) solution I know is
> www.3d-zeitschrift.de (english version is here: www.3d-flip.com ) tho
> it is not a free solution and more for publishers directly. but there
> are open source players like www.megazine3.de
> 
> hope that helped :)
>  philip
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Michael Geary <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What is the nature of your PDFs? In my experience, Flash really doesn't
>> handle *large* bitmaps well. One thing we've had success with is vectorizing
>> bitmap images.
>> michael
>> 
>> On Sep 1, 2011, at 11:54 AM, Thomas Packert wrote:
>> 
>> Hello All,
>> 
>> 
>> We are using SWFTOOLs to convert PDF images, scanned from various multi
>> function printers into FlexPaper with PDF2SWF.
>> 
>> The issue we are having is that the resulting SWF file will be 10 to 15
>> times the size of the original PDF image.
>> 
>> If the PDF is a non-image PDF then there is not the mutiplication of the
>> size of the file. I have seen 3MB Image PDF files turn into 45MB SWF files
>> by passing them through PDF2SWF
>> 
>> We have played with some of the command line switches with the PDF2SWF, but
>> that results in a resolution that is too low to make the image usable.
>> 
>> Our UI is written in flex/flash, and the users scroll through the Flex Paper
>> version of the document.  Some of these documents are 100,150, 200 pages.
>> So the ballooning of the size of the document consumes a lot of bandwidth
>> and memory.
>> 
>> Has anyone seen this before and perhaps has a work around/patch to prevent
>> the SWF file expansion to 10x the original?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Tom
>> ---------------
>> SWFTools-common is a self-managed list. To subscribe/unsubscribe, or amend
>> an existing subscription, please kindly point your favourite web browser
>> at:<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/swftools-common>
>> 
>> ---------------
>> SWFTools-common is a self-managed list. To subscribe/unsubscribe, or amend
>> an existing subscription, please kindly point your favourite web browser
>> at:<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/swftools-common>
>> 
> 
> ---------------
> SWFTools-common is a self-managed list. To subscribe/unsubscribe, or amend an 
> existing subscription, please kindly point your favourite web browser 
> at:<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/swftools-common>


---------------
SWFTools-common is a self-managed list. To subscribe/unsubscribe, or amend an 
existing subscription, please kindly point your favourite web browser 
at:<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/swftools-common>

Reply via email to