/ > /fap/ > Thread 13587
Age: 72.57d Health: 0% Posters: 5 Posts: 8 Replies: 6 Files: 1+3
>> Anonymous 29jul2018(su)18:04 No.61325 OP P1
I tried to remove the terrifying bulge from hell
[IMG] -8 adult ashley edited.swf (242.1 KiB)
550x400, Compressed. 1 frame, 45 fps (00:00).
Ver15, AS3. Network access: No. Text: No.
Bitmaps: No. Audio: No. Video: No. <METADATA>
[find in archive]
>> Anonymous 29jul2018(su)19:37 No.61328 A P2R1
Great start, now we just need someone to make a stable version with more than 5 fps.
>> Anonymous 29jul2018(su)21:06 No.61330 B P3R2
>>61328
It's because the file contains filters such as shadows and blur fps are unstables
>> Anonymous 30jul2018(mo)02:49 No.61341 C P4R3
nice work OP
>>61330
it's not that they are unstable, it's your CPU that can't calculate them fast enough in fullscreen.
you'll find out that the FPS becomes more and more stable the smaller window you view the flash in
a version of this flash without the blur effect (or with the blur distance reduced to something
like 2 pixels max) and without the bulge would be perfect
>> Anonymous 30jul2018(mo)03:39 No.61345 B P5R4
>>61341
The unstability comes from filters added, depending on cpu used the fps can drops significally.
Without them, the flash file can run more smoothly.
>> Anonymous 30jul2018(mo)04:02 No.61346 D P6R5
>>61341
>>61345
I'd do it if I knew how to remove shadows via decompiler.
>> Anonymous 30jul2018(mo)04:03 No.61347 D P7
>>61346
oops, I mean blur
>> Anonymous 1aug2018(we)13:53 No.61414 C P8R6
>>61345
it still doesn't mean the flash is "unstable", it just requires much more calculations when viewed
in larger resolution
