Flash Site Design - Flash site too big!!!

Author

Flash site too big!!!

IcklePickle

2005-05-18, 7:30 pm

Hi all

I have not even built 1/2 my flash site and its MASSIVE!!! the swf file is
4,119 kb but the html file it is in is only 2kb. how do i make the flash file
smaller? i have exported it and click on compress but it still makes no
difference.
if anyone has any ideas please let me know
thanks
x

MrMala

2005-05-18, 7:30 pm

Maybe You have too much inline sounds and uncompressed bitmaps ?
Try to compress all the bitmaps in the library and test different compression
level to keep a reasonable quality ...
Try to do the same for the sounds ( if any ) ...

David Stiller

2005-05-18, 7:30 pm

> Try to compress all the bitmaps in the library and test different
> compression level to keep a reasonable quality ...
> Try to do the same for the sounds ( if any ) ...

Reduce your Library items by reusing existing symbols wherever possible.
Load assets such as large JPGs, audo, and video from external files. Break
your SWF into separate SWFs that load each other at intervals.

David
stiller (at) quip (dot) net
"Luck is the residue of good design."

IcklePickle

2005-05-19, 8:03 am

hi

thank you both for your advice. David Stiller, what do you mean by Load assets
such as large JPGs, audo, and video from external files. can i do this if i
also want to animate them? for example one of my projects is a portfolio of
design work. to get the to work i would like to have a small image of the work
hovering and when clicked on to expand into the full size to be viewed. could i
load this from an external file?

Thanks
x

David Stiller

2005-05-19, 7:21 pm

> what do you mean by Load assets such as large JPGs, audo, and
> video from external files. can i do this if i also want to animate them?

Flash can load certain files dynamically at runtime. Files include non
progressive JPGs, MP3s, FLVs, even other SWFs (and more). If you load an
external SWF, that SWF can do anything a SWF can do (even load other assets
dynamically). So yes, you can still animate anything you load. Once it is
loaded, you can manipulate it via ActionScript as you would anything else --
but that may be new territory for you (animating via ActionScript). Of
course, you can also animate external SWFs on their own, by using timeline
tweens, then load them so that you don't have to animate via ActionScript.

Check out the MovieClip class in the ActionScript Language Reference (F1
key). In particular, the MovieClip.loadMovie() method.

David
stiller (at) quip (dot) net
"Luck is the residue of good design."

IcklePickle

2005-05-20, 8:08 am

Hi David

thanks so much for your help. just one more question i think. What is the
difference if i have a big flash file that needs to load or various flash files
that need to load? If i load movies into the main movie with
MovieClip.loadMovie(); then wont the site still take as long to load because it
will need to load several files instead of one?

Do you mean have them load at different times? what if i need them all at the
same time? Am i asking too many questions?
Im just not sure why it would help if they are all different movies being
loaded or just one if they add up to the same size anyway, does that make sense?

thanks
x

merlinvicki

2005-05-20, 7:26 pm

loading at runtime reduces the pressure on ur bandwidth since u are loading
only the files required. when u have everything inside one movie it has to load
everything even those items which the user may not even see. Reseach says that
a user will not wait for ur site to load for more than 15 secs. He will just
skip ur site. This is also a very imp issue. So keep ur swfs as small as
possible. Use shared library and other workarounds like dividing one big movie
into several small movies.....
:)

David Stiller

2005-05-20, 7:26 pm

>> If i load movies into the main movie with MovieClip.loadMovie();

As merlinvicki mentioned, the separate downloads can reduce bandwidth.
For one, you're loading content as needed. If you have five menu items
(five sections) and the user only wants to visit section four, only section
four will be loaded. Make sense? In addition, even if you don't have
sections like that, you can space out your loading over time. Maybe you
have a brief intro, then some text the user is supposed to read. While
they're reading that -- they're not bored; they're waiting -- you continue
to load other content. It reduces the perception of waiting, from the
user's point of view.
[color=darkred]

A big part of developing content for the web is architecting it in such
a way that it *can* be presented over time, rather than all at once. This
isn't print. ;) This isn't television. It is web content. If you need
everything at the same time, you may just have to suffer your users through
a long preload -- or you can rethink your presentation.
[color=darkred]

Not yet.
[color=darkred]

It makes sense if they're all displaying at the same time, but not if
you can space them out.
[color=darkred]
> Reseach says that a user will not wait for ur site to load for more than
> 15 secs. He will just skip ur site. This is also a very imp issue.

I'm curious where that statistic comes from. I just don't see how it
can be applied as a general rule of thumb. If I'm going to a site where the
content is compelling to me, I certainly wait longer than 15 seconds.

David
stiller (at) quip (dot) net
"Luck is the residue of good design."