wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: New Flash player
ptgroup 2009-Jul-03 08:43:00
thanks markus - i?ll wait and see this evening.
ciao
mike
Mit freundlichen Grussen
HMS
mailto: #removed#
Web: http://www.compulanz.de
----------------------------
Aktuelles von HMS
http://hmscomputer.wordpress.com/
----------------------------
----------------------------
360? VR Fotografie:
http://www.360de.de
NEU: Abstrakte Fotografie unter:
http://www.abstraktfoto.de
-----------------------------
Aktuelles vom Virtugrafen:
http://virtugraf.wordpress.com
-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: #removed# [mailto:#removed#]Im Auftrag von Yahoo
Account
Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Juli 2009 10:03
An: #removed#
Betreff: Re: New Flash player
Hi Mike,
taking over for Pat here, for a moment :)
With 8 K, you're exactly at the limit which causes Flash to fail as it
tries to display the raw image in one piece: 8192px.
e.g. 8190 x 4095 will work. I don't know why Adobe decided to introduce
this in Flash 9 ...
You said you tried it with smaller pictures already. These *absolutely*
should have worked.
Which software did you use to save them? Photoshop? It might be worth a
try - and I'm just guessing here - to change some of the JPEG options, like
"baseline" instead of "optimized" or "multiple passes".
So we're left with two options
a) use 8190 px, but a different JPEG setting
b) (slightly less obvious) - wait a few hours until the automated
processing has completed, which will take the large image and produce the
cube-mapped versions for flash-compatible fullscreen and smallscreen size.
The output of that process is known to work.
Note that you can already configure the flash player settings, even though
the player itself may fail.
Now the reason that b) doesn't happen in near real time is because we'd
need to seriously invest into RAM for the web server to make it support
large-scale image processing, and our hoster bills us a dollar per month per
allocated 10 megabytes - so even just going to a comfortable gigabyte would
make it rather expensive, not to mention that we'd see quite some "hiccups"
as the server dedicates his clock cycles to converting instead of serving.
That's why this processing runs on a separate machine - which isn't "always
online", hence the delay.
-Markus
>
>From: ptgroup <#removed#>
>To: #removed#
>Sent: Friday, July 3, 2009 8:46:22 AM
>Subject: Re: New Flash player
>
>
>
>
>
>Pat:
>>I just uploades an 8K/ 3.1 MB JPG image.
>>Loads succesfull "as it is .."
>>KPPano shows the loading bar but instead of displaying:
>>"...
>>too large single image ! use other format or multiresolution!
>>"
>
>>It?s not deleted- still in my account.
>>That happens yesterday with all my lower resolution images too.
>
>>Anny suugestions ?
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]