I made the following comment to someone about the beauty of swf when they
requested my FLA file so they could resize the swf I created on their Website

"That's the beauty of vector graphics. You call the dimensions in the html
page and the swf will fit to the size you need.

This person replied

"Actually David, while the text and hearts might be vector, the background
image is not. Not everything in a Flash movie is automatically a vector image.
You can tell by the color gradations in the image that it is still a JPEG. If
we force that movie to a smaller size in the HTML, it will result in a loss of
image quality. I'm not going to change anything in your FLA file other than the
dimensions of the canvas - we just want to be able to fit things into a certain
size.

While I don't appreciate this individual's condescending attitude, before I
fire back, is there something I'm missing? If an imported jpeg image is
converted to a symbol - it's a vector graphic, correct? This person seems to
know something. Any idea what point I'm missing

Thank

This person is correct. Not everything in Flash is automatically a vector

Flash offers limited support for bitmapped formats like JPG and PNG. Even when
converted to a symbol it is just a symbol that holds the bitmapped image. If
you select an imported bitmap and then go to the menu (at the moment I forget
which one!) you can convert it to to vector image. (Ohhhhh...I'm away from my
Flash right now, so I can't remember exactly which menu item it is!) But, in
general, the resulting vector graphic will look quite different. This will be
especially true for things that have gradients, blends, shadows, and gradual
changes of color

PS: Without knowing the situation or the person...I don't read any
condesention into their response

Please pardon me. I must be going through a change. In any case, I am very
grateful for everyone's comments. There's always so much to learn. And, since I
flunked pin the tail on the donkey, and had to redo kindergarten, I'm always on
the other side of the learning curve

Thank you, everyone, again

This is place is a godsend and has bailed me out more than once. But, I'm still
at a loss why this person would need my FLA file to change the "canvas size"
(my FLA files are sacred to me (maybe I just want to hide sloppy code).

As far as I know (and I have a lot to learn), the only way to change the size
of my finished swf are with the html dimensions attributes. The claim that the
FLA is needed to change "the canvas size" doesn't make any sense to me. Making
the stage size smaller only pinches off the rest of the movie. If the swf uses
jpegs, as far as I know, the only other way to change the swf is by starting
over with new jpegs. Am I wrong

"the only way to change the size of my finished swf are with the html
dimensions attributes

well it is not the only way - as you know you can set the width and height in
flash itself - but i can only imagine they would want the fla for a re-size is
because they want to also resize the bitmap outseide of flash and replace it -
doing so will bring the overall file size of the SWF down. Did they ask you for
the source of the bitmap(s) used? Would make no sense to use say a 640x480
bitmap and then resize the movie in thehtml code - because you would be wasting
precious bytes - always set dimension of any bitmp(s) being used to the final
width and height of the stage (assuming the bitmaps are intended to be the same
width and height)

Thank you very much. That's exactly what I was hoping to hear. Again, thanks to everyone who helped.

He is right, and I don't see anything condescending in his reply. So I
wouldn't fire back if I was you .. I would thank him for giving you some
knowledge you didn't have before.

You're welcome.

This place is a great resource for learning.. hope you enjoy it.

As to whether you should give them your FLAs, well that is a whole other story.
You are right in being protective of your FLAs--good or bad actionscript
doesn't have anything to do wth it. Depending upon the arrangement you have
with these people (customer?) you should never give away the FLAs

I usually explain it like this to clients. Most people have had the experience
with a professional photographer--for a wedding, family portrait, graduation,
prom, etc. In that case what you buy is the prints. The negative belongs to the
photographer. Same with desktop publishing, clients buy a printed brochure,
booklet, or ad. The source files (PDF with layers, Quark with editable text,
etc.) belong to me. If you want changes from what we originally discussed or
you approved, then you will pay me

And so it goes with the FLA. Once somebody has that they can make all kinds of
changes. Either because they are cheap, or even worse they could do things
which might be unprofessional or look bad and this could reflect poorly on you
as a professional. So if possible, don't give them the FLAs

If you can't work that this time (I'm assuming this is a client?) chalk it up
to that learning experience thing. But in the future make it a standard part of
all contracts you have with your customers. Explain that they will receive
sfws, html, etc, but that the original source file will be yours. Of course you
would be happy to sell them the source files! (I generally double, or a bit
more, the cost of the the project if it includes the sources.

[quoted text, click to view]
sources.)[/q

In my role as a customer, I insist on source 100% of the time. Otherwise,
you're
dependent on the vendor to make any changes, updates, etc. What if Rothroc
Enterprises (or whatever) moves to Hawaii next week? I'd have to hire anothe
developer to re-create all the Flash movies when it came time to update

And if you double your price for including the source, I probably go elsewhere
--
Carl Fin
Please respond to the newsgroup only

Well of course it depends on the project and all. But I maintain that if you
want the source, you should pay for it

My work as a professional (again most of this is coming from design for print)
is valuable and I have a professional reputation. I won't be cut out of future
revisions or have the quality of my work questioned because somebody decides
that their nephew who took two night classes in Quark could do a great job with
the Annual Report next year. Or perhaps completely redesign a newsletter and
them have the templates taken over by the secretary who has always wanted to be
a designer

If a customer wants to go down that path, we will have the discussion at the
beginning and they will pay for the ability to keep their options open in the
future. That is also why it is important to discuss this up front. It isn't
that they are being held hostage to me. If they want to own the code/source
files, then hire me on full time, pay my benefits, and my SS taxes. If they
hire me to do this project as an independent contractor, then they get what
they paid for: a finished product

With this policy does come professional responsibility as well and when I did
move cross country (and also didn't necessarily want to service my old
customers) I made each one a disk with the source files. However if I had
desired to keep them as clients I would not have done this. There is no reason
they couldn't have continued to use me

As I said the whole thing is very similar to professional photography. Which
most people have experienced and understand. (Even if they don't totally like
it.) Most people in that industry follow the practice, so consumers have no
choice.