.flv or .mpg

[ericahlstrom]

I just purchased Sorenson squeeze, which has the ability to create .flv files with remarkable quality. My question, assuming that the end user will have the latest flash codec or will allow my program to install it, which would you use mpeg or flash video. I will be required to accommodate OS's as far back as 98se with their outdated video cards.

The obvious reason for my desire to use .flv is so that my video can be more tightly integrated with the rest of the flash elements.

Any suggestions?

Eric

[yosik]

if OS up to win98 will be in use, I would suggest going with mpeg, especially if you will be using "real" video and not illustrated images.

Yossi

[ericahlstrom]

if OS up to win98 will be in use, I would suggest going with mpeg, especially if you will be using "real" video and not illustrated images.

Yossi
Thanks

That's what I am going to do.

[eric_darling]

Yes - Win 98 plays better with MPEG - particularly because the machines themselves won't hack FLV very well.

Keep your eyes on Flash video, though. Macromedia has already announced the next version, which you can pre-order (delivers in September). This new release will include an amazing new video codec that is superior to WMV 9, widely accepted as the best thing going in widely used video codecs today. Better yet, the new codec will be backward-compatible with previous versions of the Flash player/plug-in. This will mean a quality hit on earlier versions of the Flash player, but still - backward compatibility! Amazing stuff.

[ericahlstrom]

Yes - Win 98 plays better with MPEG - particularly because the machines themselves won't hack FLV very well.

Keep your eyes on Flash video, though. Macromedia has already announced the next version, which you can pre-order (delivers in September). This new release will include an amazing new video codec that is superior to WMV 9, widely accepted as the best thing going in widely used video codecs today. Better yet, the new codec will be backward-compatible with previous versions of the Flash player/plug-in. This will mean a quality hit on earlier versions of the Flash player, but still - backward compatibility! Amazing stuff.

I can't wait. Finally I will be able to tightly integrate my flash interfaces with video, especially for my Win98 systems. :yes

[AGRO]

http://www.flashmagazine.com/1131.htm

[AGRO]

http://www.flashguru.co.uk/maelstrom/
http://8ball.andre-michelle.com/lab/
http://www.ericd.net/2005_08_07_blogger_archive.inc#112351045243132724
http://www.fenomas.com/flash8/
http://www.flashcomguru.com/index.cfm/2005/8/8/vp6
http://www.unitzeroone.com/eightball/split/
http://johngrden.blitzds.com/Puzzaz/8ball/Puzzaz.html
http://www.franto.com/blog2/collected-links-to-maelstrom-examples
http://public.hbk-bs.de/~baumgarn/zoomquilt/zoom.htm

[Intrigued]

Wow!

Expect to see any filter from Photoshop converted to a real-time Flash filter.

And...

The codec match up Sorenson Spark vs. On2 VP6.2, SWANKY nice!

*Does quasi EndZone dance, minus football*

:yes

[yosik]

My guess is that THE NUMBER ONE REASON Adobe has bought Macromedia is Flash.
The way FLash8 looks and the trend it is going towards may indicate that in a couple of years (even before that), we"ll see a merge between After Effect and Flash, completing an across-the-board merge where Illustrator incorporates some of Freehand features, Dreamweaver and Golive become one, Fireworks disappears with some of its features getting into Photoshop.
Furthermore, Acrobat sucks in FlashPAper (or actually becomes one with it) and Premiere remains as the Video Editing package of the group.

It WILL be interesting....

Yossi

[Corey]

I believe the reason Adobe bought Macromedia is growth. I believe it was purely a financial play. As far as I can see product considerations didn't factor into it at all. I believe that the marketing teams within Adobe are highly fragmented and, to an extent, are competing with each other, and I believe that's *exactly* how Adobe wants it because that's the climate which racks up the largest numbers at the end of the year. :yes

I predicted the release date of the new Flash player within 72 hours right here on this forum months ago. I also nailed the release date of the new version of Flash within a week, several months ago. This leads me to believe that I've got a reasonably tangible handle on what's going on there. If I'm right, it doesn't bode well frankly for the days of creative considerations. I'm afraid nothing matters anymore but numbers. For years Adobe has been providing some of the worst quality support in the industry so the writing has been on the wall, but it doesn't lessen the sadness of witnessing my favorite company evolve into a mindless eating machine.

Adobe Audition is really all you need to look at to see how Adobe handles their acquisitions. Syntrillium was a great group with some revolutionary code and with one swipe of the mighty pen, Adobe erased all of that forever. :o

[yosik]

I see what you mean, Corey and I agree with most of what you are saying.
But, at the end of the day, Adobe IS manufacturing software programs and WANTS to keep atop of things, so some sort of decisions in that matter will have to be made.
As to Adobe swallowing small companies, Microsoft does the same (and much much more...). It is not to say that it is good, just that it is a sad fact of our times.
We, the end users, have actually NO choice but to try and make the best of it for us.

Yossi

[eric_darling]

Here's Macromedia's word on compatibility of the new Flash 8 player. It looks very good, since they've tested it pretty thoroughly:

http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer/productinfo/systemreqs/