Questions about Rev/Transcript vs. other toolkits
Troy Rollins
troy at rpsystems.net
Wed Aug 11 21:34:00 EDT 2004
On Aug 11, 2004, at 8:53 PM, Chipp Walters wrote:
> Certainly there are some imaging tasks which can be done better in
> Flash or Director, and some done better in RR. I seriously doubt
> ButtonGadget could be built in either Flash or Director. Among other
> things, ButtonGadget has a transcript-coded compositing engine and
> convolution filter.
>
> In fact, I wouldn't know if you can directly edit the binary data of
> images (bits and bytes, not pixels) in either Flash or Director w/out
> some sort of external.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on RR, but I also know Director quite
well. ButtonGadget could not only be done in Director without any
externals, it would have MANY more options. Director has a full
compositing engine based on direct access to C libraries which is, to
say the least blazingly fast, and incredibly powerful. Granted, it is
an advanced function, and one which you don't often see, but in reality
it is no harder than anything else. It is SO fast, that there is no
need to render, buttons like buttonGadget produces can be rendered, and
animated in real time.
--
Troy
RPSystems, Ltd.
http://www.rpsystems.net
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list