jpeg too big in flash
- Started
- Last post
- 43 Responses
- unknown0
*thump *thump *thump
i give up
- ribit0
there is no true physical dimensions for a digital image.
and we already design for 150dpi (or any dpi)...A Palm Tungsten screen is 150dpi (320pixels, 2inches wide).
- unknown0
all that 96 dpi screen etc... just means it can handle a bigger reslution.... aka 2000x1400 or whatever..
DPi should be stricken from the web and monitors at the rate....
- ribit0
a 96 dpi just means the image is physically smaller for a give image size (x by y pixels) than it would be on a 72dpi monitor.
and larger than it would be on a 150dpi monitor...
and smaller than it would be on a 10dpi monitor... etc.
- unknown0
i think its time for me to write a book and get rich off of stupid people
- kpl0
qburt, if you want to make a point, say it. don't point to a 136 post thread and expect people to know what you're talking about.
In the meantime, since you missed it the last two times I posted it:
import two images, identical in pict format, with one 300dpi, one 72dpi into flash. The 300dpi is [scaled] smaller on stage, the 72dpi shows up with its true dimensions.
- unknown0
didnt miss.. just choose to ignore cuz you missing the point why it shows up smaller...
- ribit0
what does that tell us?
(sorry I came in late)
- kpl0
wow. I had to post that three times before I got a response addressed to it. ooh. so it's irrelevant. yet I don't know why, because I naively thought we were talking about flash's behavior (it does say "flash" in the subject line, confusingly enough), not whether monitors actually show a given dpi.
in any case, if you write a book, q, please take care to actually write some content, and don't just say in it to read another book somewhere else.
- unknown0
ugh
- kpl0
grr
- unknown0
hehe
- unknown0
I'm with you KPL on this one... at the end of the day a pixel is a f**king pixel...
take a mobile phone for example some of those screens have a ridiculous dot pitch, it just means the image appears smaller.
BUT
With flash importing an iamge at 300 dpi will result in it appearing tiny.
- unknown0
er... so you're both right.
It's not everyone else you should be telling it macomedia... if you import dynamically an image it is alright... but if you import something during authoring, and it's not 72dpi it f**ks up.
- unknown0
ya...
it has something to do with flash converting the 300 to like its comprable 72 dpi size... so if you import a 800x600 saved in the settings at 300 it sees that at imports it and converts it to like 400x300 or something like that.stupid flash
- unknown0
phew!
- DigitalMe0
this might require a new annoying thread, but I always thought dot-pitch was the smallest displayable pixel size?
uh, nevermind. this thread wore me out when combined with the 72 vs. 96 thread.
- kpl0
flash sucks. FUCK YOU MACROMEDIA.
- unknown0
flash 2004 mx sucks a fat one too........
takes my computer 5 times longer to load it than the old version..
not to mention they took out basic actionscripting and replaced it with behaviors... so pretty much if you dont know advanced coding you have to rely on their presets... wtf
- DigitalMe0
blasphemers!!!
I'll love Flash even if it burns my house down and calls me an accountant!