File: Le Black Swordsman.swf-(9.45 MB, 1920x1080, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 12/12/16(Mon)19:16:05 No.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 12/12/16(Mon)19:44:19 No.

  Saw this on /wsg/ as a webm, and it was half the size.

  I still ove you swf, but damn.

>> [_] Anonymous 12/12/16(Mon)23:26:16 No.

  >>3188247
  >Saw this on /wsg/ as a webm, and it was half the size.
  >I still love you swf, but damn.
  from your last line it appears you are bashing swf but i dont think you know how little the
  filesize means.

  did you really thoroughly compare the audio quality, resolution, frame rate and visuals of every
  single frame to make 100% sure the webm was of the exact same quality yet still half the size?

  even if you did that doesn't matter because webm can't have the audio detached from the visuals
  like swf can. so even if the visuals are somehow the same quality the webm audio is guaranteed to
  be something like 20% of the length it is in the flash. maybe you didn't even think about the
  audio and the webm was mute?

  perhaps im being harsh but ill have no senseless trashtalking of the swf format in here while im
  around. especially when you're trying to put webm above swf, which is laughable. webm doesn't
  even support scripting, it's not even on the same playing field as swf.

>> [_] Anonymous 12/12/16(Mon)23:50:08 No.

  >>3188329
  someone is butthurt because they called their swf a huge bloated file.

>> [_] !Wulf.Eb.mY 12/13/16(Tue)02:11:52 No.

  Honestly it is bloated, what swf has that html5 video lacks is vectored assets. This is just a
  prerendered piece shoved into an swf. It doesn't gain from being in an swf.
  It's the same issue I have with swfs being turned into webms and other static formats, it loses
  the infinitely scalable vector assets.
  Take the case of a SWF made back in 2006.
  http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash10/altf4/showdown(www.albinoblacksheep.com).swf
  It doesn't have the quality loss that you'd get from a video from 2006.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WgT9gy4zQA
  It's simply because the standard for video quality was between 360p and 144p back then, but swfs
  were vectors, so a flash may have been designed around those smaller resolutions, but it was
  upscaled with no loss in quality and fits today's standards with ease.

  Each one has the fit and purpose.

>> [_] !Wulf.Eb.mY 12/13/16(Tue)02:20:09 No.

  And on the topic of filesizes, the same happens in reverse:
  http://i.imgur.com/0arJ41H.png
  The mp4 is the 1080p version of ultimate showdown from NG.
  91.5MB (mp4) vs 2.8MB (swf)