mawe schrieb: > Mark Winterhalder schrieb: > >> Yes, the Flash IDE is what I meant. >> >> I'd be curious about an experiment somebody with access to Flash could >> do: A simple SWF with just a single PNG, once with lowest compression, >> then highest compression, and how those compare to each other and a >> Swfmill equivalent. >> I mean, we can see with Zlib how lossless compression can differ >> depending on how many cycles you throw at it, but if SWF's lossless >> compression varies in size, I wonder why it's not at highest per >> default. >> >> Mark > > Tested it at work, with a 24 bit PNG with semi-transparent areas, saved for > web out of Photoshop: > > - Original PNG: 858 KB > - SWF output size, with JPEG quality for publishing set to 0 (zero): 177 KB > - SWF output size, JPEG quality set to 100 (hundred): 627 KB > > The low quality version showed heavy artifacts and was, well ... low quality. > I couldn't notice any differences in quality for the high quality version, > despite the 200+ KB > difference in filesize. > > Maybe this helps. > > Matthias
Almost forgot, here's the PNG used: http://typeofundefined.com/stuff/screens/website_web.png I don't have swfmill at hand here, so maybe someone else wants to built it. Matthias _______________________________________________ swfmill mailing list swfmill@osflash.org http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/swfmill_osflash.org
