There is a difference between invisible and not being rendered my friend,
even if you can't see something doesn't mean its not there ;)
*Fahim Akhter* |* Software Design Engineer | White Rabbit Inc* |
+92.321.5307672 | akhter.fa...@gmail.com |
http://apps.facebook.com/feline-frenzy/
On Thu, Mar
On 3/4/2010 2:04 AM, Fahim Akhter wrote:
There is a difference between invisible and not being rendered my friend,
even if you can't see something doesn't mean its not there ;)
Your intentions are correct, even if your terminology is not.
Don't confuse the word rendered with the word
It only makes sense that Flash decompresses jpgs when it loads them. The visible
property has nothing to do with that.
When you say visible = true, that would be the absolute worst time to decompress
the image. Imagine decompressing 1000 jpgs at once in a for loop. Imagine when
setting
Steven Sacks wrote:
Don't confuse the word rendered with the word processed. Rendering is
the act of drawing pixels on the stage. Invisible DisplayObjects are not
rendered (though alpha 0 ones are) during the render phase, but they are
processed.
If you have 1000 invisible sprites on the
Hi Andrew...
Even though you said it might not be the renderer, I wonder if you set the
stage quality to medium, that might make a difference, as the anti-aliasing is
processor intensive. If that degrades the text of your textfields, you could
see how the fields appear using device fonts.
It depends on a lot of factors, here are some from the top of my head:
- Frame Rate
- Image Raster or Vector
- If using vector images are they cached?
- How many vector points does the image have?
- Are the objects on the screen only rendered or are vectors outside the
frame being rendered
Thanks!
Mendelsohn, Michael wrote:
Hi Andrew...
Even though you said it might not be the renderer, I wonder if you set the
stage quality to medium, that might make a difference, as the anti-aliasing is
processor intensive. If that degrades the text of your textfields, you could
see how the
Thanks Fahim. Could you please clarify:
We're using vector images. How do I control if vectors oustide the
screen are rendered?
For reducing CPU usage, is it better to cache the images or not? Many
of them are being cached because we're using a lot of filter effects.
Fahim Akhter
Setting the _quality to LOW has no effect on the CPU usage, so would
this point to some cause other than vector rendering?
The application uses a lot of memory, about 200,000K, but this would
necessarily require a lot of CPU usage, right? Lot's of apps use way
more memory but not use so much
If your application zooms into vectors and has different magnification
levels, I would not recommend caching. In all other situations caching works
out fine for me.
Well for example , lets say you are rendering three building (vector) two of
them are currently on stage ( user can see them ) the
Are you using a lot of flex components on top of each other? Is it an
animation? Be a little specific about what your doing so someone might find
a way out :)
*Fahim Akhter* |* Software Design Engineer | White Rabbit Games* | T:
+92.321.5307672 | akhter.fa...@gmail.com |
Yeah, if you have any images animating, remove the caching, as it has
to cache every time it moves.
Also, if you have any listeners that can be deleted after being
called, do that as well.
Karl
On Mar 3, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Fahim Akhter wrote:
If your application zooms into vectors and has
Karl DeSaulniers wrote:
Yeah, if you have any images animating, remove the caching, as it has to
cache every time it moves.
Also, if you have any listeners that can be deleted after being called,
do that as well.
Animating as in not being just moved around without changing the size,
rotation
Things are looking much better.
I had made a really stupid interface kludge when somebody decided that
we needed a layered-tab look. I took the main display layer, duplicated
it 5 times, and then used depth swapping to change the current display
item. We've since dropped the layered-tab
What's odd to me is that all of this CPU is getting used even though
these movie clips are completely invisible.
Invisible as in visible = false, or alpha = 0? Rendering alpha at anything
under 100% is quite cpu intensive.
Regards,
Keith Reinfeld
Home Page:
You could remove from the display tree or do the visible = false thing to
help out.
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Keith Reinfeld keithreinf...@comcast.netwrote:
What's odd to me is that all of this CPU is getting used even though
these movie clips are completely invisible.
Invisible
as in: _visible = false;
Keith Reinfeld wrote:
What's odd to me is that all of this CPU is getting used even though
these movie clips are completely invisible.
Invisible as in visible = false, or alpha = 0? Rendering alpha at anything
under 100% is quite cpu intensive.
Regards,
Keith
I'm glad you found the issue. I was about to make another
suggestion--I will anyway, because it's a nice trick.
Set the frame rate as low as you can, and still get smooth animation.
A frame rate of about 20 fps is often good enough, and the Flash
engine has to process fewer frame events. Movies
18 matches
Mail list logo
