FLASH: Re: LiveMotion Pros & Cons

[Michael Ninness]

> Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 14:21:09 -0700

>

From: jdowdellmacromedia [dot] com (John Dowdell)

> Subject: Re: FLASH: Re: LiveMotion Pros & Cons


> Howdy Mike, it's nice that you come by here... I hope you're not

> uncomfortable if I ask questions on some of the features you posted.


Anytime, baby. By the way, have I ever told you that you have a GREAT job?

Daniel and I still want to buy you a beer or a Pepsi at the next flashfoward2000

conference in NYC. Let's hook up if you are going to be there. I digress, so on

to your questions...


>> Multiple File Formats (it's for Web graphics AND animation)

>

> In case you haven't seen this, Flash exports as GIF animations, JPEG and

> SWF too. There's also QuickTime export, Illustrator files, DXF, PNG

> sequences, more.


Yes -- we mentioned those on the product comparison page although we missed

DXF.  It's very cool that Flash puts out sequences and QT, but let's not kid

ourselves:  the bitmap output quality just isn't up to snuff.  This keeps

Generator from getting wider acceptance.


> If the qualifier is instead "LiveMotion offers multiple file formats for

> sliced images", then the compression, optimization, and slicing control

> found in Fireworks has been on ImageStyler owners' wishlists for quite some

> time.


> Why does the LiveMotion product literature still emphasize export formats,

> when it's less capable here than either Flash or Fireworks? This isn't a

> flame or a challenge... I'm just really curious what leads to that

> unanswered emphasis, thanks.


The focus on export formats is there for two reasons --

1. LiveMotion has integrated vector and raster tools/effects in a single

application. Going with your line of thought, LiveMotion combines some of the

vector/raster capabilities  of Fireworks with a powerful timeline. It is an

improvement in the workflow. If I want to create raster effects in Flash today,

I can't. I realize that last sentence could cause an entire new thread about the

evils of rasters, but the bottom line is that rasters and vectors have their

respective places and uses. I have to go outside of Flash to Fireworks or

Photoshop, create my raster artwork, and place it in Flash. LiveMotion makes it

easier to work with both in a SWF workflow.


2. LiveMotion is meant to be a file format agnostic authoring environment. As

killer as SWF is, it is only one of many Web formats that people need to author

too. It's pretty cool that LiveMotion allows you to re-purpose your composition

to as a sliced, JavaScripted HTML layout. LiveMotion will continue to author to

existing web formats and will author to the new formats in the future, such as

SVG. I am sure we would all be interested to hear your comments on if a future

version of Flash will export to SVG. :)


So, each tool has its strengths and gives you a set of options, and it's up to

the user to choose the right tool or combo for their needs.  But I don't think

that not matching the combined feature set of two distinct products (not to

mention offering capabilities that neither possesses) reflects particularly

badly on LiveMotion.


As for the Fireworks features you mention being on ImageStyler owners' wishlest,

let's not get off track here. Photoshop/ImageReady have always been the

competition for Fireworks, not ImageStyler.


> when people have asked why the "Library" in LiveMotion is so different from

> the existing Library in Flash, the reply has been that LiveMotion handles

> dynamic library functions for you, hidden, with a name of "alias" instead of

> "library".


Yes, LM does handle much of the work of making and tracking symbols.  It's smart

enough to realize when you're using multiple copies of the same object and

stores them in the SWF only once. The Export Report lists the names of the

Symbols in the SWF and tells you how many times they are referenced. The Library

in LM is simply for storing assets that you want to use again, where as in Flash

it is that AND a Symbol manager.


> But if you apply a transform to such a cloned element -- such as skewing

> something you've duplicated, for instance -- then from what I recall of the

> beta all the other copies will also skew. In other words, the transform

> matrix seems to be applied to the original copy of the artwork, rather than

> to its instance on the screen.


Aliases are slightly different.  You're right that a transformation applied

to an instance of artwork with aliases is applied to all linked copies of

that artwork, but it's very easy to enable and disable this linking via the

Make and Break Alias commands.


>> Time-based Timeline (as opposed to Frame-based)

>> Object-based Timeline (as opposed to Layer-based)

>

> I don't feel good about either of these... trying to stick a time-based

> sequencer atop an event-based animation format like SWF is difficult. I

> could see a time-based sequencer atop a time-based format like QuickTime,

> but in formats which play every frame, there may not be an exact time.


I'll bet that a survey of Flash users will reveal that most projects have moved

beyond the old 12 fps default.  Faster processors mean you can raise the frame

rate and reap the rewards of smoother motion on systems that can handle the

load.  Unfortunately, even the best Flashers can't always know how a composition

will appear, so they have to err on the low side to be safe, knowing that to

adjust the frame rate later without screwing up their

timing would be murder.  The same goes for trying to hit file size targets: it's

hard to know whether they'll be able to afford the hit associated with tweening

at higher rates, so they have to play it safe.  LM's time-based system frees you

to experiment with different frame rates.


Frame independence gives us a good foundation for distributing animation over

time a la sequences and Object Time. It also reinforces that the timeline in LM

can be used to author more than just SWF.


> This interface problem has already confused people trying LiveMotion, who

> implicitly assume that frames will be dropped so that the sequencer's

> labels will match reality. What use do you see for a seconds-based timeline

> today...?


That's why it is called a Timeline and not a Frameline. People want something to

occur over a given amount of time and, in most instances, want it to occur as

smoothly as possible. If indeed the viewers machine can handle the animation,

then this works. If not, then LiveMotion and Flash stumble over the SWF playback

engine trying to play every frame rather than keeping time.


Macromedia already realizes that a play-every-frame-no-matter-the-speed approach

isn't always the best;  that's why they came up with streaming sound that drops

animation frames to match the time specified.


> And I know that the product literature is already far down along the path

> of "object-based timeline", but it's really a parameter-based timeline...

> you can have keys and tracks for each animatable attribute of an object,

> not just the object itself. (Think of the distinction between MacroMind

> Three-D and early Infini-D, for instance... this difference drove the later

> parameter-based keying of Electric Image and CoSA AfterEffects.) I don't

> think this will actually hurt anyone, not like the previous problem will...

> it's just a funny neologism, that's all.


Neologism being "a meaningless word coined by a psychotic" (this from

Merriam-Webster)? ;-)  I think we're being a little more accurate than that, but

I suppose it's all semantics (kind of like calling our After Effects software

CoSA After Effects). I have to admit John, your subtlety is  oh so smooth! :)


You make an interesting distinction but I think the truth is halfway between the

two. We place object names in the timeline and its attributes are animated over

time rather than placing objects in layers and then animating the layers and

keeping all of the object attribute keyframes in a single "bucket".


> Anyway, I hope you're comfortable with the above... I'd really like to

> learn why there's a continuing emphasis on file formats for export, and

> whether there are indeed deeper library differences than just having it

> hidden, thanks.


I am completely comfortable with the above John. I do enjoy the conversation. I

wish I had the kind of time and focus to do this all day like you are able to.

Bottom line:  LiveMotion is more than a me-too-Flash application.  It's a

powerful Web graphics editor and animation package that uses a different editing

metaphor than Flash. Some people will like it, some won't.


> btw, if you happen to come across a SWF made with LiveMotion that you're

> particularly excited about, then I'm sure folks here would like to see it

> too, thanks.


There's a thread on the Adobe User-to-User forums with a couple of hundred

messages showing off work.  It's neat to see where people have started and how

much better they're getting as they've had a little more time to use the

software.  I know you know the URL John, but for the others on the list, check

it out at

http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/main.html.


There is also some sample animations that were made at an Art Director's

conference. These animations were made by art director's who had no prior

experience with LiveMotion. They were given a 3 hour introduction class with the

Beta, and then had 2 hours to make their animations. They can be seen at:

http://www.adobe.com/web/features/adim/main.html


Don't forget about that beer John!


cheers,


Michael Ninness, LiveMotion Senior Product Manager

Adobe Systems Incorporated




flasher is generously supported by...

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

World Animation Celebration - Big Internet Animation Pow Wow Discount Offer


Register before May 25 mention flasher and save 25%!! www.wacfest.com


Be discovered, get a job or have your web series picked up.  A big talent search for Shockwave

and Flash animators is happening May 30-June 4 in Hollywood.  Featuring Rob Burgess, Matt

Groening, Brad Bird and more.   www.wacfest.com

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

To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

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

helpchinwag [dot] com