Re: [Swftools-common] Problems with PNG placement

[Chris Pugh]

.. of course, it would help greatly if I'd actually added the link!!
Here we go:

     http://www.flagstonesoftware.com/cookbook/what_bounds.html

Sorry all ;o)


Chris,

On 18 March 2010 12:50, Chris Pugh <address@hidden> wrote:
> This seems to be a reasonably thorough discussion of bounding boxes,
> and the relationship between space co-oridinates for shapes, and space
> co-oridinates for movies.
>
> HTH
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Chris.
>
> On 18 March 2010 12:09,  <address@hidden> wrote:
>> I have the same problem with image positioning while moving or rotating
>> an image.
>> If I compile this code:
>>
>> .flash bbox=200x100 filename="ftest1.swf" fps=25
>>  .png slika1 "pict01.png"
>>  .put slika1 pin=center x=100 y=50 scale=0%
>>  .frame 50
>>  .change slika1 rotate=360 scale=100%
>>  .frame 100
>> .end
>>
>> the picture finnishes as rotated for only around 350 degrees (see
>> attachment p1.png).
>>
>> If I, trying to compensate, change the code to this:
>>
>> .flash bbox=200x100 filename="ftest1.swf" fps=25
>>  .png slika1 "pict01.png"
>>  .put slika1 pin=center x=100 y=50 scale=0%
>>  .frame 50
>>  .change slika1 rotate=361 scale=100%
>>  .frame 51
>>  .change slika1 rotate=360
>>  .frame 100
>> .end
>>
>> then it is almost correct, but not quite (rotated around 358 degrees).
>>
>> But if I change the code as Mick suggested (thanks Mick!), it ends up
>> rotated correctly (of course, in HTML embedding code I leave width=200
>> and height=100):
>>
>> .flash bbox=2000x1000 filename="ftest1.swf" fps=25
>>  .png slika1 "pict01.png"
>>  .put slika1 pin=center x=1000 y=500 scale=0%
>>  .frame 50
>>  .change slika1 rotate=360 scale=1000%
>>  .frame 100
>> .end
>>
>> The swfc version I'm using is 0.9.0 and was installed in Ubuntu 9.10
>> from Ubuntu repositories. I checked viewing the .swf with Opera and
>> Firefox browser, in Ubuntu Linux, and WinXP, and I get the same results
>> in all of them.
>>
>> Regards,
>> nevenq
>>
>>
>>> Hi Chris,
>>>
>>> Refusing to give up, I took a look at some of the code. Twips seem
>>> to crop up quite a lot in various routines. I had assumed the metric
>>> used for size, position etc. was pixels. Out of interest I
>>> multiplied all my pixel values by 20 to convert them to twips. This
>>> gave:
>>>
>>> .flash filename="test_swfc.swf" version=6 fps=50 bbox=8700x2440
>>>   .png img1 filename="test.png"
>>>   .put img1 scalex=8700 scaley=2440
>>> .end
>>>
>>>
>>> The image now renders perfectly. The HTML maintains the original size
>>> in pixels as specified by the object tag. Notice I had to add the
>>> scalex and scaley properties to the .put command. Additionally, any
>>> subsequent zooming or moving of the image is now carried out with a
>>> great deal more accuracy.
>>>
>>> I'm still not sure I fully understand why this method works better.
>>> It would be nice if someone could maybe explain what is happening
>>> under the bonnet and how twips and pixels fit into the bigger picture.
>>> Anyway, for now I have a workaround :-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Mick
>