sifr or flir?
- Started
- Last post
- 5 Responses
- joelski
does anyone have experience using http://facelift.mawhorter.net/
I am not sure what I should use sifr or flir?
obviously the advantages of using flir is image replacement rather then flash...but is it buggy on different browsers?
- acescence0
never used it, but it looks interesting. the two major differences i see are that this puts the processing on your server vs sifr, which happens on the client side. not sure what sort of issue this is, or what kind of cpu drag this creates. i know generating image stuff can be pretty taxing on the server if load is heavy. also, with sifr, the text is still selectable and you can copy/paste, this is just an image so that's not possible.
- ismith0
sIFR is more sensible imo.
- 1pxsolid0
That's pretty cool. The benefit over sifr is no flash required. But as said about the text isn't selectable..
- monNom0
sIFR3 is quite nice to work with (compared to sIFR2)
http://novemberborn.net/recentbut can be funny across browsers and maybe a bit slow for lots of instances. I found it crashed safari when paired with mooTools.
another option is FIR (I think that's it) where you set the
background of a text element as image text, then overflow: hidden;
height and padding-top: equal to image height.
foolproof full layout control and no javascript to break. no selection though.- FIR requires you to make each heading in photoshop. But it gives you full control.monNom