Re: FLASH: FH9 vs AI9 (was: Curved text)

[J. Lutes (pixelTwiddler)]

Wow!  Since the fun I was poking seems to have been lost, I will go ahead

and respond to the genuine response.


>Hmm, it might have beeen FreeHand...


Bingo!  I was just getting tired of having to endure one extraneous Adobe

jibe for every relevant point made (useful or not) in response to someone's

innocent question.  My whole post was a return jibe.


>PostScript-writing tool may not be concerned about curve count, and Flash's

>built-in curve optimization and layering effects can help greatly.


I belong to a support group for freaks who exercise precise placement

control over their vector lines as they are constructed.  What you are

saying doesn't apply to those of us who are actually keeping track of curve

segment and point count along the way.


The current optimization automation has not proven to be more accurate,

however much faster.  In Flash, the math which approximates the curves for

this optimization leaves a quality degredation that encourages/fosters

being such a control freak.


There is an automatic curve "optimization" in Flash that is unavoidable any

time artwork gets imported.  If you've brought in a lot of outside line art

(and subsequently broken it apart), you've seen this -- especially for

complex multi-frame sequences output from the popular 3D converters.  Those

who appreciate this uncontrollable behavior, raise your hands.


Here is another test for the folks at home.  In Illustrator, draw yourself

some wacky vector shape that has several (exaggerated) bezier curves in it.

 Save it out as something flash can understand, then import it into Flash.

Immediately export it as AI, then open it in Illustrator.  Who seems to be

more concerned about curve count?  Flash, or the PostScript writing tool?


>> It is too bad for designers that Macromedia has persisted in clinging to

>> legacy Future Splash technology for color and gradient handling, even in

>> version 4 of Flash.

>

>? The SWF representation is pretty compact. What would you prefer?


You are missing the point.  I am not refering to how the information is

stored in the file format.  That is fabulous.  I am refering to the way

colors and gradients are handled inside of the development environment.

That is a deficient Future Splash holdover (or it wouldn't finally be

getting replaced in Flash 5).


>True, the selection model is different... Flash 4 doesn't have actual

>Inspectors which modify the current selection, as Fireworks and other tools

>do. The SneakPeeks at FlashForward did show that the Flash engineering team

>was working in this direction, so it's likely that we'll see a more

>Inspector-based model in future versions.


Likely?  Anyone who has seen the preview (in California, Washington, or New

York) knows that the Fireworks model is what is being adopted.  Of course,

the "SneakPeeks" could be a smoke screen for something better...


>> ...or get more accurate color translations for imported artwork.

>

>That may still be hard, depending where the art is coming from... for

>instance, there are a few posts each week in the Adobe areas where people

>get fouled by colorspace profiles, monitor settings, even color definitions

>like LAB vs CMYK.


I guarantee by your answer that you misunderstand the problem.  It is not

that people "get fouled" by color space issues, or that it is some other

program's fault.  This is a Flash deficiency.  No matter the color space

used (and I think I understand them well), some colors aren't even close in

the translation from Illustrator to Flash.  On the other hand, I can take

Illustrator artwork created in any color space, bring it into FreeHand, and

the colors are beautiful.  I don't even have to know a thing about color

spaces.  Isn't that great?  If FreeHand understands well enough to

translate correctly, one day Flash can too.  Unless you think that it isn't

possible to take FreeHand artwork (or FlashWriter output, for that matter)

into Flash with accurate color results.


I would rather see you say something like, "To hell with Adobe and their

Illustrator format!  We aren't going to support them at all." than to make

excuses for obvious Flash weaknesses.


>> ...until the day it can be transferred as editable text along a path,

>> instead of just in blocks....

>

>Sorry, to import editable text along a path would require that Flash itself

>have the concept of text-on-path. (Fireworks 3.0 can export SWF with

>editable text, or text-on-path, but not both simultaneously, because Flash

>can't edit text-on-path.)


Bingo!  You understand this issue perfectly.  That is why touting the

current editable text feature seems comical, at best.


Flash is really a great piece of work that is improving with time, but it

sure seems like some would have the masses believe it is something far

superior to what it actually is.


Thanks for letting me rant.



-

J A S O N   L U T E S

ICQ: pixelTwiddler (#18046724)

E-mail:

jasongrafikimagism [dot] com

flasher is generously supported by...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

     flashforward2000 and the Flash(tm) Film Festival

 July 24-26, 2000, NEW YORK CITY, Hammerstein Ballroom

                  www.flashforward2000.com

   Produced by United Digital Artists and lynda.com

 Sponsored by Macromedia, Adobe Systems, Fusion, Inc, AtomFilms,

           shockwave.com and Electric Rain.

 1.877.4.FLASH.4  or (1.805.640.6679 outside the US and Canada)

 Register before June 30 and save $200!!-- www.flashforward2000.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/flasher or email

helpchinwag [dot] com