Sneak PeakFlash site UPDATED 8/30


Grazie wrote on 8/31/2004, 11:28 PM
BB, please email me "Doing without most of time for nearly a year I can say for me at least my eyesight seems to not only just come back but improve. Curious " PLEASE, please email me:

graham UNDERSCORE bernard @ lycos DOT co DOT uk

Best regards,

Cheno wrote on 9/1/2004, 8:28 AM

I never called your picture ugly, however as Spot suggested, it may behoove you to include a more flattering image.

We have provided input. Constructive critisizm, mind you. You asked for input, not just in how the site looked in a browser, but how the site looked in general. Personally, it stinks. If you want to provide content, work on the content. Delivery has a lot to be desired and as pointed out earlier, is the icing on the cake after a worthy attempt at providing good information.

I admire you for even attempting a website. I can't design, nor do I ever want to. I still admire all those who attempt it though. I will say that design needs a lot of work. Perhaps it's worth getting someone involved that knows how to make it clean and aesthetic? Of course it's yours and you're entitled to whatever look you want.

wcoxe1 wrote on 9/1/2004, 10:02 AM

I'm using the latest Netscape 7.2, with what is supposed to be the latest Flash, but when I go to:

The whole thing is about 2 x 2 1/2 inches. Kinda hard to see and read. No messages, no offers to upgrade, nothing. Lots of VERY fast spinning world, enough to make one dizzy, but that is about all. I can see in small print the words Video Demo. Those are the only words visible.

Widders 2000 in case you need to know. Latest service pack, what ever that is.
jeremyk wrote on 9/1/2004, 11:19 AM
Hi, Billy Boy.

I looked at the site with Opera 7.52, build 3834, running on Windoze 98, monitor set at 1024x768.

The intro page looks as I imagine you intended it to look. But on the main page following the introduction, the blue and white selection menu on the left has quite small characters.

I selected 3d effects. The text that appeared when I passed the cursor over the thumbnail was tiny -- about 5 pixels high. Zooming in with Flash (right clicking and selecting Zoom) brings the text to a reasonable size.

The text in the "simulate depth of field" tutorial was a readable size.

I was able sometimes to get full-screen display by pressing F11, but after I ran the tutorial I couldn't get the normal display back, nor could I switch to another browser window with ctrl-tab. I had to exit the flash presentation to get control of my browser back.

I have to say I don't like Flash here. The thing that it does best, which is to present information at a certain speed determined by the author, is exactly what I don't want to have happen when I'm using a tutorial. I want the action to proceed at my pace, not the author's. While watching the stately progression of graphic elements across the screen, I remembered how much I hated web browsing before I got broadband acess.

And if it's a website that works only with IE, forget it. That's a program I need more incentive to run than the most essential of tutorials.

I LOVE your tutorials, and have gotten much information from them. I appreciate and applaud your efforts to help the Vegas community, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree here.

Best wishes,
BillyBoy wrote on 9/1/2004, 11:59 AM
Netscape has a tiny portion of browser market. Their browser doesn't seem to understand width or height tags if they are set to a percentage at least not for Flash. Other browsers like IE and Opera do and present the site full screen as it was intended to be seen.

I 'm aware of that issue and the small text issue which is only a problem if you have your resoluton set to 1024x768 or shutter, something less. Most said before I started the project some months ago that they used 1280x1024, so I went ahead on that basis. It isn't that I don't know some use lower resolutions, but you got to target the majority and I didn't know Flash would scale in such a non standard way. Normally I test at all resolutions before I put anything on the web. Didn't this time for this for two reasons. I freaked over the SP2 issue and wanted to see if others saw what I was seeing, and if I change my resolution all th icons on my desktop, all 70 of them get scattered all over the place and I can't find anything, and I din't want that.

The issue is if you want to present a full screen presentation, which I do or did anyway mainly for sutff nobody's seen yet and now probably never will in their original form because for sure I'm not feeling very charitable at the moment and see no point wasting more hours on top of the hundreds I already have spent finding some pretty slick ways to do things with Flash, including animiating how-to with a Vegas mock-up within the Flash presentation but forcing such things into a tiny little window ain't going to cut it. It barely fits at full screen.

Also Flash seems to scale the space differently than a web browser does for traditional pages so as some have seen at lower resolutions where normally objects get larger, they get smaller. This can be overcome but the cure is worse than the problem. While I haven't tried it yet I would assume dropping the Flash movie in a table will scale it normally, but doing that probably will introduce a scroll bar for some viewers again spoiling the presentation and forcing some to scroll sideways which I hate and I'm sure most do.

Because of SP2, using JavaScripting for more advanced fixes which would create content based on your browser (my original intent if needed) now causes a ugly warning box to pop up or it haults the script cold in its tracks thinking its malicious which is crazy. If I would have put the sample up a week sooner before SP2 only those with Netscape would have the problem, because I could have easily provided alternatives based on browser or resolutions issues, now because of the damn stupid SP2 doing what it does causes more problems then they are worth trying to work around. MAybe I'll reseach some other alternate methods.

No, as you can tell I'm not in a very good mood. So basically, I 'll address the size issue first, then I'll see what I can do about browsers like Netscape, but that's down the road a bit so hang in there.

The reason the world spins so fast is its just a small run of still images each only on screen for about 1/24th of a second. To make it slow down would mean a much larger file size or some other approach which would probably make is jerky. I though it was kind of cute.

MJhig wrote on 9/1/2004, 12:21 PM

I sympathize with your pain. I know what it's like to work on sites for hours on end and find my grand ideas either don't work for everyone or are just plain unappreciated.

However addressing the resolution issue hopefully making some sense, my internet PC has a 14" (diagonal) monitor. I don't surf the net on my multimedia rig. A resolution larger than 800 x 600 would be masochistic and no I don't wear or need glasses. On a small monitor like this fonts are tiny natively and even on the net setting IE to ignore the sites settings with the text size at "Largest" it's just barely reasonable researching the net.

I also do PC Doctor work and small monitors are not uncommon in my travels, also 8 of 10 PCs I work on have dial-up connections. Sure many video guys will have bigger rigs and broadband but I bet 50% that visit your site will not.

If font size is not adjustable by the user at a site I can't see how that could be a good thing.



I read all your tutorials at your original site and appreciated them. The comments made in heat about your original site were just that, so it's not CBS or Universal Studios, it's functional.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/4/2004, 10:36 AM
Frustrating is a understatement. Over the past couple days I tried several different things, each has it own problems because of either the damn SP2 issue or specific browser users. Then when I had at least a workable solution for Netscape browsers, none XP versions of Windows I tested it on introduced more problems for people using IE.

So I guess my full screen version is dead for now. It worked fine if you used XP and set your resoluton to 1280x1024 and DIDN'T install SP2. If you did or used a different browser or different version of Windows anybody's guess what would happen.

Obviously I need a few days break from the project. So you may see something totally weird or nothing at all on the new site for awhile. :-(
Grazie wrote on 9/4/2004, 10:55 AM
BB - yeah . .. put yer feet up . .. come back fresh -yes?

usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:21 PM
BillyBoy, no body cares about your ugly damn website. If you cant fix the problem, why are u showing it off to everyone else. In fact, questions about vegas should be posted here, not how to fix your goddamn ugly flash site which u havent been able to fix from a month. Get outta here.
usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:22 PM
BillyBoy, no body cares about your ugly damn website. If you cant fix the problem, why are u showing it off to everyone else. In fact, questions about vegas should be posted here, not how to fix your goddamn ugly flash site which u havent been able to fix from a month. Get outta here.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:33 PM
For those that want to see a limited version that works for IE, Opera and Netacape at 1280x1024 and 1024x768 try this:

Just interested on input for text size.

usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:43 PM
BillyBoy, no body cares about your ugly damn website. If you cant fix the problem, why are u showing it off to everyone else. In fact, questions about vegas should be posted here, not how to fix your goddamn ugly flash site which u havent been able to fix from a month. Get outta here.
usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:45 PM
the new link that you posted on 9/4/2004 12:33:20 PM doesnt even work, idiot. Go home.
usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:46 PM
the new link ( doesnt even work. Ha ha, sucker.
usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:47 PM
the link doesnt even work, sucker.
usman152008 wrote on 9/4/2004, 12:48 PM
the link doesnt even work, sucker.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/4/2004, 1:03 PM
Ignorant hot heads like you make me wonder why I waste time trying to help people. If you don't like the site which I've repeated said is a work in progess don't visit.

That too hard for a a-hole like you to figure out?

Here's some help for the mentally challenged

a. extend finger
b. click on ignore This user
c. press button

DavidMcKnight wrote on 9/4/2004, 1:20 PM
Dang....BB, I'm sure you realize that you've been in disagreement with folks here on different issues and ideals, but this most recent rant by usman is just plain mean and idiotic. It appears he cannot tell when he's pushed the Post Message button or not. Don't let it get to you. Come back fresh and work on it later.

Cheno wrote on 9/4/2004, 2:18 PM
"That too hard for a a-hole like you to figure out?"

The correct grammar would be "an a-hole"

Maybe some english lessons along with the web design ones you need.

I agree with taking a break. Maybe hit the library while you're at it. All the web design books you want for free, provided you don't already have late fees.

Let's get back to Vegas and worry about the site when you're done.

rique wrote on 9/4/2004, 3:34 PM
The text size is large now but so is the whole page and it spills off the bottom and right of my 1024x768 monitor. Without scroll bars all I can see is the top left quarter of the page. Running IE w/o SP2.
aussiemick wrote on 9/4/2004, 9:22 PM
Same settings,same problems. Easy to see why there are SELECTED Beta testers.
Keep up the good work, much appreciated.
JasonMurray wrote on 9/5/2004, 6:32 AM
Because of SP2, using JavaScripting for more advanced fixes which would create content based on your browser (my original intent if needed) now causes a ugly warning box to pop up or it haults the script cold in its tracks thinking its malicious which is crazy.

If you insist on preparing different page + SWF combos for different browsers and different resolutions, you can just put a selection menu as the first page on your site - let the user pick the one thats best for them?
JasonMurray wrote on 9/5/2004, 6:36 AM
btw - since I've had a decent enough dig at your stuff :) I should add I'd be more than willing to help design and build a HTML+CSS site for this, if you'd like.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/5/2004, 10:16 AM
How many times is it necessary for me to say I'm not building a HTML+CSS site? That's child's play ANYBODY with a little experience can do that. FOR Pete's sake HTML is just a mickey mouse markup language!

Getting a full Flash site to present well for everyone is far more difficult, more so now that the idiots at Micro-crap threw a monkey wrench into the mix with their SP2 garbage. It isn't that I can't quickly fix it for ME, but I'm building the site for YOU and for sure some having to deal with annoying pop-ups imposed by Micro Crap will get old fast. So time for another approach.

The main problem areas are these:

1. With SP2 installed any "active content" including Flash can be treated as "hostile" by IE Explorer popping up a moronic warning box and asking the user if or not he wants to proceed then even when saying yes and clicking though IE still naggs about it. RIDICULOUS!

2. User residence to full screen mode. People are creatures of habit. Got it! Most web pages you visit (because its easier) leave the ugly browser scroll bars (needed or not) along with a menu and tool bar at the top of the screen. This WASTES a considerable amount of screen space that could be used for content. Again with SP2 installed and JavaScripting to redirect content based on OS, browser name/version is blocked and/or a forced margins and title bars are added. UGLY!

3. Readability issues. Before starting the project seveal months ago I made a point of ASKING what resolution most people used. Its hard to believe anyone doing SERIOUS video editing it trying to do it at a crappy resolution of 1024x768, but I guess some are. With one or two exceptions most replied 1280x1024 or higher. The trouble is If you put Flash in a fixed space ie (full screen) then the content scales based on resolution. So unlike normal web pages that's only HTML where text INCREASES in relative size as resolution goes down, a Flash page at full sceen gets progressively smaller...the reason why some people can't read the text.

4. Browser quirks. The three most popular browsers EACH have an annoying default status or "bug" that prevents a Flash page from looking right once you get beyond the crap you're use to seeing. I'm not making your typical bing bang boom little banner at the top and that's all the Flash there is. ALL the content on my new site is Flash for several very good reasons I'm not going into right now.

The known browser issues are these:

a. If you use Micro-crap's IE browser AND installed SP2, while you can defeat most of the annoying things it does this requires you to either make a Registry change or fiddle with the settings to override. Leaving SP2 do its thing causes nag screens and/or depending on what I want to do clumsy workarounds. Micro-Crap PROVED with SP2 they don't understand how the web is suppose to work. You never break someone else's technology (JavaScript) to make your crappy browser "safer" from hackers, because you're too damn stupid to know how to develop a truly secure operating system. Yet that's exactly what Micro Carp has done and I'll remind everyone that's what the Redmond morons have done every chance I get.

b. By default the Opera browser hogs about 15% of the width of your screen to show a Explorer view. If a full screen page is presented it can cause readabiliy issues at lower resolutions. At full screen mode (from browser) it works fine. Again the issue here is end user resistance to charge from their default browser settings. Amazing how some people can't be bothered to click a button that enables a far better view of the material presented, but they can write several 100 line rants complaining about a known unfinshed project where I'm only seeking input on readability and loadability issues.

c. Netscape's laughable attempt at a browser as they have demonstrated in the past is they STILL ignore or do some things its none standard way. Again trying to embed a Flash presentation in a set space where percentages are used (IE and Opera handle this fine) the Netscape browser is too dumb to know how, so it squeezes the content into a tiny space at the top. The solution is to use a set size, not percentages, but then it can look either too big or small depending on resolution.

What i have up now (test2) was meant as a joke. I'm showing how ridiculous it can get if you want both larger text and a lower resolution. Again to "fix it" we're stuck with browser issues when presenting at full screen. I hope you understand I have no intention of keeping the text THAT big.

So like I said, I'm taking a few days off from the project. When I get back to it, I'll make a more traditional Flash presentation, presenting it at a fixed size. This solves the text size issue. Depending on how much I can get on screen in a limited space, because not using full screen takes away about 15% of the useable space I'll problaby use either 12 or 14 point text. That is very readable even at 1024x768.

So the bottom line isn't that I don't know how as some have rudely hinted, rather its the same issue it always is; HAND HOLDING to get people to see the light. So the plans I had to offer a truly interacive site with lots of bells and whistles is on hold, because it just won't work well without full screen and right now that's more trouble than its worth considering the reception my efforts got here.