Flasher Archive

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: Re: FLASH: Overall Design Question - mixing flash and html
From: David Gary Studios
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 23:56:44 +0100

-----Original Message-----
From: Jefferis <Jefferisatpathway [dot] net>
To: Flash MailList <flasheratshocker [dot] com>
Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 3:09 PM
Subject: FLASH: Overall Design Question - mixing flash and html

>You all ever heard of the proverb: "The Cobbler's Son has no shoes?"
>That's the way I feel... I've got so much work to do for clients, I never
>seem to get around to finishing my own site :-( or learning the rest of
>I love the design and art part of my work, but I get more demand for now
>in marketing and writing and simple sites... oh well, at least I am
>making a living... but my site gets left for weeks at a time... and I
>feel unprofessional... I still haven't advertised it yet because of
>But here's my question and observation. I have viewed quite a lot of
>your sites, and they are ASTOUNDING. But I am just as concerned with
>reaching that 15% that doesn't have Flash and won't install a plug in...
>because of commercial concerns. SO for now, all my sites have to be DUAL
>html and Flash for those who express the desire, and plain html the most
>One thing I notice is that dedicated flash sites seem to use all menus
>which load various movies, which means that the entire LARGE file is
>loaded before you see any part. Once loaded, you switch between movies
>relatively rapidly.
>This situation makes it seem as if moving between plain html and Flash is
>un-aesthetic, and the norm is full Flash and only flash when a client is
>capable. But I am wondering if this flashy use of Flash should be the
>norm. I noticed the problem when trying to use a Flash Menu to go back
>and forth between my html pages and my flash samples, etc. The use of a
>separate flash movie as a menu makes a back button require time to load
>[first time] instead of being an instant cached page... I am not happy
>with it. {PLUS I find that the text menu's with ample mouseover areas
>are still hard to click and select without hitting an adjacent one, but
>that just may be my fault]. {JC has written me a fix for this situation,
>but still, large movies require a lot more waiting for many clients].
>So, I am wondering if a better alternative as a low bandwidth norm is to
>use small Flash graphics on html pages, as faster versions of animated
>gifs. I.E., instead of making the whole site Flash enclosed, to use
>Flash as the ornament... So far, most of you pros don't do your sites
>this way, and perhaps that is just because you want to show off your
>capabilities [ and I don't think you are wrong for doing that!].
>But for average clients's sites, I would think faster loading, low
>bandwidth flash graphics might just make regular html pages zoom... And
>that mixing small flash graphics on regular html pages will allow the
>more normal and less time consuming html link navigation [especially for
>pages that are text oriented and informational].
>Does this rambling make sense to anyone, or am I just out in left field?

hiya Jeff,

Your points are valid, however remember we are all still fairly new to flash
and good, effecient flash
implementation. The problem it seems is that alot of Flash sites out there
had the developer in mind
instead of the viewer. Personal sites more than corporate identity. We all
want to do our best and sometimes
this excludes the viewer. All in all though, Flash graphics vs HTML, Vectors
load much faster. Ive only seen few
developers using flash as animated graphics. If the viewer has flash
installed why wouldnt you use it to your full advantage? Of course it all
depends on the project, but I see few reasons to use flash just for animated
banners, simply due to the fact that the viewer HAS to have the plug-in.
Also flash active states seem to be much more effective(if designed
correctly) than triple clicking on HTML links to finally get them to
Of course I also use a tablet so others experience may vary. If you feel
like you are waiting to long for a flash site especially corporate, then
usually A: the developer didnt have your bandwith as a target,. B: They were
not developing for the end user, but maybe trying to WOW the client, C:
They arent experienced enough to understand the medium completely, i.e.
streaming techniques or other effective uses(look at MMs own "flash4 new
features" choppy and "studdering" loads(no preload programming) section,
they show use of importing 32 bit jpgs.(big nono) See even the big boys dont
know what they're doing). or D: You havent been surfing the net long. <g>

Remember that Flash's reputation is limited to the _use_ of it.


-David Gary-
Interactive Media Producer/Designer
Dreamwave Productions, Inc
<dgarystudiosatmpinet [dot] net (mailto:dgarystudiosatmpinet [dot] net)>

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an
email to list-manageratshocker [dot] com. Problems to: owneratshocker [dot] com
N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.
For info on digest mode send: info flasher to list-manageratshocker [dot] com

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]