how about an image pool - so you cache a number of images - better if you have thumbnails available to load otherwise, i would recommend resizing the bitmap data ...
20000 at once is a lot - if it's a list type thing you want, I found Spark lists with a custom item-renderer worked well with pools of images - especially as the spark list uses pools of object for it's list items - so you wont have to load all that at once.. your app should load the images as required... it's what i used for the AIR app @ http://gedit.kurst.co.uk/ - but - well, definitely not tested for so many images. MXML List I used : <s:List id="imageList" itemRenderer="com.kurst.galleryEditor.skins.DataListItemRenderer" dataProvider="{galleryData.imageCollection}" creationComplete="{dataController.imageList = imageList}" left="10" right="0" top="0" bottom="0" dragEnabled="true" dropEnabled="true" dragMoveEnabled="true" borderVisible="false" borderAlpha="0.0" contentBackgroundAlpha="0.0"> <!-- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ --> <!-- DATA - IMAGE LIST LAYOUT--> <!-- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ --> <s:layout> <s:TileLayout columnWidth="130" rowHeight="130" horizontalGap="10" verticalGap="10" /> </s:layout> </s:List> Item Renderer: http://kurst.co.uk/transfer/DataListItemRenderer.mxml And object pool: http://kurst.co.uk/transfer/DataListItemController.as won't compile but might give you and idea, the only thing i did not build into the pool was a size limit. code is is not commented ( sorry ), but might help... and not tested for 20000 images... but that should be the concept. good luck - karim On 6 Aug 2010, at 21:44, Oleg Sivokon wrote: > > Just have one Loader and one Bitmap (or probably 16 or about that number in > the second case). When you handle the load complete you get the loader's > content and draw it to the bitmapdata, remember where it was the last time, > load next image, draw again and so on... However it will work, I would > imagine that it will take some time to load all the images... I still don't > understand why would anyone want to view so many images simultaneously... Can > you maybe convince the customer that seeing 20000 images at once isn't the > best user experience? I mean, what will they see on an image 10x10? you won't > be even able to tell if that's a man portrait or a flowers pot... > >
