TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- OT: What software can build a Flash website?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

yeah sure i know XHTML 2.0 and CSS3 will be a relief, and about the loading times, well maybe i was wrong. � just love animation, maybe thats why I'm not that objective.

btw Flash Vector graphics are like 100x (?) smaller than html (gif/jpeg) graphics, thats what I was trying to say

quote:

Originally posted by Thois yeah sure i know XHTML 2.0 and CSS3 will be a relief, and about the loading times, well maybe i was wrong. � just love animation, maybe thats why I'm not that objective. btw Flash Vector graphics are like 100x (?) smaller than html (gif/jpeg) graphics, thats what I was trying to say

Not necessarily. It depends on the complexity of the vector graphics and the dimensions of the JPEG. My experience is that a well programmed webpage with good CSS programming don�t need that many images for layout. Flash usually contains TONS of JPEG/PNGs to make the layout work.

That�s another point. It takes really hard work to create stunning web pages with pure Flash (meaning no imported objects).
Of course, vectors are really good, but to create anything really cool you need tools like Illustrator, because vector graphics with no effects are quite boring.
Prove me wrong. You can�t make anything that�s much better than a well programmed webpage with a good style sheet and a couple of images.

One thing Flash will make smaller, is animations. And there you have it. It�s main purpose. That�s what Flash is most used for.

quote:

Originally posted by armanivespucci I agree with that to a point. I am a graphic designer, and I finance almost all of my music with graphic design. There is a simple truism about web design: You can have the best content in the world, but a flashy website sells better than a plain site with plenty of great text. I have made sites with minimalist designs and great content, and I have made sites that resemble Depthcore.com desktop backgrounds. Guess which paid more? Websites are advertisements, and advertisements are (technically) art. You're trying to catch the eyes of customers. So, regardless of your field of expertise, a professional website WILL enhance your image. Flash sucks most of the time, but a slick-looking HTML site is simply good advertising.

Totally agree. Sites that are slick *and* follow standards are going to make the best impression.

quote:

Originally posted by Corteoz Not necessarily. It depends on the complexity of the vector graphics and the dimensions of the JPEG. My experience is that a well programmed webpage with good CSS programming don�t need that many images for layout. Flash usually contains TONS of JPEG/PNGs to make the layout work. That�s another point. It takes really hard work to create stunning web pages with pure Flash (meaning no imported objects). Of course, vectors are really good, but to create anything really cool you need tools like Illustrator, because vector graphics with no effects are quite boring. Prove me wrong. You can�t make anything that�s much better than a well programmed webpage with a good style sheet and a couple of images. One thing Flash will make smaller, is animations. And there you have it. It�s main purpose. That�s what Flash is most used for.

Agree. What flash has going for it over everything else though, is how damn easy the scripting is to learn. It's entirely object based, so, for example, making a table based on a database is as easy as saying, here is the database, parse the variables and put them in this format. I could write it in about 5 mins. You couldn't do that with html, and as far as I've seen, php and asp are 5x harder to do anything remotely advanced. I could be wrong, because frankly the scripting for those formats is intimidating and I haven't touched them.

As far as not using flash for a music website, that's hogwash. I've made html websites and flash websites and guess which ones get the attention? Dur, the flash ones.

It's the difference between someone saying "nifty, yah, you do what now?" and someone saying "F**king AWESOME, when does the CD come out?"

Flash is to Webdesign

as

Pro Tools is to Audio

ok, arguable, but it puts them in the right kind of area.

Neither is absolutely necessary, nor are they much good on their own, but in the hands of a skilled artist as part of a suite of tools produce wonders. In the hand of an unskilled practitioner both are disasters.

Neither are for hobby use (Unless you have deep pockets or a lack of concience). It's pointless arguing "Flash Sucks", it doesn't. Designers suck, or they rock.. Much like musicians or producers.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Don't build your entire web site in Flash. Have an intro (with a "skip" button), a banner, even parts of your navigational interface in Flash if you really think that's necessary - but not the whole site. I don't want to get into the whole argument again, but here are a few quick reasons why you should never do this: 1. Bookmarks don't work. 2. Browser navigation doesn't work. 3. Some people don't have Flash and don't want Flash. 4. Some people block Flash because of its use in intrusive ads and popups. Sites made in 100% Flash just irritate viewers. You've been warned. FYI, the only application that can make Flash elements is Macromedia Flash (surprise surprise).

Couldn't agree more with Digi here, in this case the 'less is more' motto DEFINATELY implies.

Flash has a lot of restrictions towards navigation and ease of use / userfriendliness - that's why I have kept Flash animations to a strict minimum for my website as well.

quote:

Originally posted by djglacial Agree. What flash has going for it over everything else though, is how damn easy the scripting is to learn. It's entirely object based, so, for example, making a table based on a database is as easy as saying, here is the database, parse the variables and put them in this format. I could write it in about 5 mins. You couldn't do that with html, and as far as I've seen, php and asp are 5x harder to do anything remotely advanced. I could be wrong, because frankly the scripting for those formats is intimidating and I haven't touched them. As far as not using flash for a music website, that's hogwash. I've made html websites and flash websites and guess which ones get the attention? Dur, the flash ones. It's the difference between someone saying "nifty, yah, you do what now?" and someone saying "F**king AWESOME, when does the CD come out?"

Regarding the scripting. PHP is actually easier to learn than ActionScripting. PHP is both a scripting language and object oriented. It's up to the user to define how advanced it should be. ASP is object oriented, but it's syntax is really easy, so it's just a tad more difficult to learn than PHP.
PHP can be used as a scripting language as well as object oriented. In ActionScript you'll first need to learn the basics of object oriented design.

Actually, ActionScript is better compared to JavaScript than serverside technologies. But, it's just details...

quote:

Originally posted by Corteoz Regarding the scripting. PHP is actually easier to learn than ActionScripting. PHP is both a scripting language and object oriented. It's up to the user to define how advanced it should be. ASP is object oriented, but it's syntax is really easy, so it's just a tad more difficult to learn than PHP. PHP can be used as a scripting language as well as object oriented. In ActionScript you'll first need to learn the basics of object oriented design. Actually, ActionScript is better compared to JavaScript than serverside technologies. But, it's just details...

Good on ya. I was hoping for a reply like that. Seeing as you say so, I'll look at php again.

Though, it's nice that in flash you can say

object._x = object._x + 1

and the object moves. Anyone who knows how to graph can understand that w/o any programming experience whatsoever.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.