Daily Dish of Dominey Design
{  September 13, 2005  }

The best new feature in Flash 8

Flash 8 iconWithout a doubt, there are plenty of things to be excited about in the just released Flash 8 -- filters, bitmap caching, new video codec, UI improvements -- but the one I'm most giddy about is the least sexy of the bunch, yet could have the greatest impact for the general public. I'm talking about FlashType.

Typography in Flash has always been a very sore subject for me. From embedded fonts to system text, Flash has a mind of its own when it comes to setting type. Sometimes it renders a font pretty well, other times it turns it into a mish-mash of wildly kerned characters, closed apertures, disappearing serifs, and blurred characters. It's no wonder countless developers everywhere turned to bitmap fonts -- despite their own tendency to be easily blurred -- for when set properly they were more legible than web fonts like Verdana, Arial, and most definitely Georgia, or anything with a serif for that matter.

With Flash 8, Macromedia smartly decided to fix the problem once and for all by licensing the Saffron text rendering engine, which is analogous to Clear Type in Windows XP or OS X's built-in text smoothing, and renamed it FlashType. It's only available in movies that are published as Flash Player 8, which is too bad, but the difference is extraordinary.

To see what I mean, check out this comparison. The image on the left is a screen shot of SlideShowPro's gallery in Flash Player 7. On the right, the same gallery using the same typeface (Lucida Grande, 9px) in Flash Player 8 with FlashType. They look like two different typefaces.

Notice how even and balanced the kerning between characters is, how the apostrophe in "It's" in the "Eye of the Beholder" description properly hangs between the t and s, how "Alf" in "Alfred" in the "World War II Workers" description is given proper room instead of cramming the three characters together. In short, it's more legible, even set at 9 pixels, without blurring or kludgy spacing.

FlashType renders the line between what's Flash Player content and HTML (or bitmaps containing text) practically non-existent. And that's a very good thing not just for Flash developers, but for the web users everywhere they create content for.

Fancy pants filters and effects come and go, but type is here to stay.

Comments

Its better sure, but the spacing is still pretty kludgy, streets capes neo n, do main, img s etc etc. We've a long way to go yet...

Posted by: myname at September 13, 2005 5:28 PM

Wow, that's so much better. Way to go Macrodobia or whatever it's going to be called!

Posted by: Dave Simon at September 13, 2005 5:36 PM

I wonder if they've actually fixed the Mac version bug that doesn't save the Library palette with your panel layout? It always seems to be there, version after version ...

Posted by: UniversalHead at September 13, 2005 6:35 PM

Ummm, probably a stupid question but it looks like you're not using anti-aliasing at all in the left screenshot, whereas in the right one, you are... thus comparing pretty much two entirely different fonts, no?

A better comparison would be showing Lucida Grande (or any other font) at a small size with anti-aliasing turned on in both cases. In this scenario, there are clear differences in quality... all to the benefit of sIFR I might add!

Posted by: Mike D. at September 13, 2005 6:43 PM

I take it that the rendering engine is in the player, have you done any sIFR with v8? My concern is that rendering time might be slower. Still I'd trade a few seconds for some decent looking typography.

Posted by: sng at September 13, 2005 8:33 PM

Just got started with 8 today, and I am floored by the new FileReference class that allows for uploads within a flash movie AND it allows you to track the progress of those uploads.

For those of us who have been waiting for progress tracking in PHP without all the hacks, this is sweet...

Posted by: Brad Daily at September 13, 2005 8:42 PM

I hadn't done Flash-related projects for a long time until a few days ago, and just downloaded the Flash 8 plugin for OS X. I'm not (yet) familiar with any Flash 8 techniques apart from these mind-boggling examples, but this I can tell -- screen redraws and animation speeds that were painfully, excruciantingly slow on the Mac are finally up to par with the PC plugin's performance. If anything, that alone made my day.

I can't wait to put myself up to date on Actionscript 2 to get all of this mojo working.

Posted by: beto at September 14, 2005 1:33 AM

Well, the very important fact for me is to be able to activate or desactivate anti-aliasing. Does the new version force anti-aliasing ? That would be a huge error. With Flash 7, i had the choice between aliasing or anti-aliasing by choosing a html type or postscript type. Now, i feel lost.

Posted by: Raphael at September 14, 2005 6:52 AM

"Does the new version force anti-aliasing ?"

By default, yes, which was part of the reason why I used Lucida Grande, a system typeface on OS X, as my example.

In earlier versions of the Flash Player any system font (like Verdana, Arial, etc) had to be embedded in order for anti-aliasing to be applied. Which is part of the reason why I've rarely used system faces in my Flash movies. But with Flash Player 8, you can publish dynamic text fields assigned to system typefaces and they will be anti-aliased just as nicely as an embedded face, but without taking a byte size hit in your SWF.

But getting back to the point of the question, yes, you do have control over this, and it's actually more than just on/off. You can turn it off, or use "Anti-Alias for Animation", "Anti-Alias for Readability", or even "Custom Anti-Aliasing" where with a couple of slider controls you can set the thickness / sharpness of the type to your preference. It's very slick.

Posted by: Todd Dominey at September 14, 2005 8:02 AM

Ohhh - that looks very nice!! One of the most exciting features for me as well! Can't wait to receive my copy.

Thanks for the info!

Posted by: Mikkel Bech at September 14, 2005 12:34 PM

Also, just to point out that all the control you have in the ide over fonts, you have access to API's with ActionScript to allow you to build controls in flash and adjust the textfield via code.

Posted by: Ryan Matsikas at September 14, 2005 3:38 PM

It's interesting to me that many would declare the right version superior so quickly. Those smoothed fonts work beautifully at higher sizes, but for a lot of 'regular' type, I feel they sometimes backfire. This is why I think the ClearType approach is better than trying to do all text.

Antialiasing involves blurring, basically, and when you combine that with substandard vision, things can get a little too fuzzy for smaller type. Every time I run into the other room to test Safari, I marvel for a little bit, but inevitably get a little irked and long for my crisp, readable fonts.

To be fair, I'm more of a utilitarian that doesn't give a shit if it my body type looks like it was ripped off the printed page. I embrace the limitations of the medium that are really just bystanders to what's more important: I need to be able to read it.

Posted by: Seth Thomas Rasmussen at September 15, 2005 10:42 AM

Yeah, the type update is probably one of the best features, but high performance blurring and drop shadows (when used properly) can be pretty damn handy.

One thing I feel Macromedia really missed with this release is an "Outline" filter for creating solid colored outlines (similar to glow without the blurring).

On a similar note, I think we could have lived without the "Bevel" filter which is bound to be abused across the internet in the coming months.

Posted by: Noel Billig at September 19, 2005 12:39 AM

Hi Todd,
I agree that the anti aliasing is way cool. It is about time that Macromedia started paying attention to how Flash handles type. It would be equally nice, from a production view point if Flash would recognize a font that has been activated without a restart, or would auto activate a font, or offered a way to export with linked graphics and fonts packaged the way page layout has offered since the days of sticks and rocks. What a pain to hand off an .fla and have someone unable to work because they don't have some font I forgot that I used!

Slightly OT, I know that you are a Mac user - how has Flash 8 performed on your system? It is almost unuseable for me (G5 + Tiger) due to scary , excessively long save times. I had to switch to a 3 year old laptop with XP.Works great there (oh the shame!)

Posted by: Greg Wostrel at September 20, 2005 12:51 AM

One thing I am interested in is if they have added more functionality with CSS. I am currently working on a project with subscript, superscript and odd characters and it is difficult to get them working correctly with css.

Posted by: Rob at September 21, 2005 5:28 PM

The FlashType (aka Saffron) engine is quite amazing. I've done numerous comparisons with ClearType and the old Flash 7 renderer: FlashType is clearly superior to Flash 7 and is on par with ClearType. Nice job Macromedia!

Posted by: Jim Lucier at September 30, 2005 5:01 PM

The strangest thing about what your saying, is that i prefer by far the type on the left in your example. I find the rendered text on the right very difficult to read and blurry.

Is this right?

Posted by: Martin at November 2, 2005 3:49 AM

Too bad they didn't upgrade the css... still no line-height or margin-top or -bottom. What is the use of css if simple html like h1 and p do not display properly. Sure the new features are very cool, but designing a simple layout and getting it to work in flash with dynamic content is still a pain in the ass... I'm a bit dissapointed.

Posted by: sjeiti at November 7, 2005 12:32 PM

I also find the save time on Mac G5 tiger scary - freezes or takes 5+ minutes? Huge bug there any feedback on this bug?

Posted by: dan at December 2, 2005 4:53 AM

archives

You are reading "The best new feature in Flash 8" in the individual archives.

Check out other recent posts in the Flash category

Return to the front page.