Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Adobe After Effects swf export – same file, different size ?

  • swf export – same file, different size ?

    Posted by Bernhard Rieder on May 21, 2007 at 3:09 am

    Hello friends !

    I’ve made some animations in AE, and so I decided to export these test animations as .swf file.

    You can see here animation 1, with 999 KB:
    Animation 1

    You can see here animation 2, with 2.240 KB:
    Animation 2

    When you download, you also can see the difference in the file size.
    The second one has more then the double size from file 1.

    But I’ve used for both the same settings:
    1024×300 with 20 fps, and 141 frames in total length – of course the same export options for swf, also the audio options.

    Hmm, I am really wondering about that difference, because I’ve exported the same lenght with exatcly the same settings, and in one file I do have 1 MB , and in the second one the double size.

    I thought it doesn’t matter which effects I use in my AE scene, because the images were exported as an image sequence and so it will not effect the file size.

    Hmm, but it seems to be, that this is totally wrong.
    Can that be ?
    Or is there something I really didn’t recognized ?
    Please let me know which options are responsible for the increase of the file size in animation 2.swf ?

    Hmm, I am really a little bit confused now.

    Thx for every little help.

    Bernhard Rieder replied 18 years, 12 months ago 3 Members · 7 Replies
  • 7 Replies
  • Omnidecay

    May 21, 2007 at 5:24 am

    To me it looks like your second comp would be about double the size. You used at least double the particals (the lenght of the streak is much larger than the first) and you animated a 3d camera. Simple, 2nd comp has more in it than first comp=2nd comp bigger.

  • Quejet

    May 21, 2007 at 6:46 am

    hes right, the reason your file size is larger is because there is alot more movement in the second clip.

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

  • Bernhard Rieder

    May 21, 2007 at 12:25 pm

    Hello friends !

    Well, the second animation maybe looks longer, but it’s the same length. You can use you stopwatch.

    the only thing, why it looks longer is that I didn’t have 141 frames completly in the first animation, so I’ve just created a second layer to get sure, to fill 141 frames.

    Well, I promise, both animations do have the same length, and 141 keyframes with 20 fps.

    Do you know what I mean ?
    thx a lot.

  • Omnidecay

    May 21, 2007 at 4:59 pm

    But its not the lenght of the clip that matters, its whats in the clip. Say I make two different clips but they are both 5 seconds long:
    Clip A) has a ball just sitting there, no x or y movment just a rotation.

    Clip B) has the same ball except this time instead of just having it rotate its bouncing all over the screen. Plus I now have a 3d camera shadowing the ball.

    Both clips are the exact same lenght but clip B has much more going on inside of it. There for clip B would be MUCH larger than clip A. Most of the time, the lenght of the clip doesnt determin the size of of it. I could also have a 10 min short that would be about 8 gigs of stuff. There is no rule saying I cant make a 1 min short 8 gigs or larger. It all depends on what you do inside your comp.

  • Bernhard Rieder

    May 21, 2007 at 5:51 pm

    wow, that’s really interesting, I didnt know that.
    Because I thought if you made some animations, it’s nothing else than images, or better an image sequence.

    If I would use these images in Flash, well… I would use 141 images for each movie. I thouht it doesn’t matter which images, because every image has the same size.

    And so the content of the image… well, I thought wouldn’t matter.

    I can remember, I did some flash animations 5 years ago, and I’ve loaded the image sequence into my flash scene, just one layer.

    Hmmm, so I am still wondering that it makes a difference what is happening on the images, or better the content.

    Or maybe this is just the export from After Effects, I think that would need another test to get sure…

    as I said, I just can’t imagine that an image with 1024×300 with a ball on it, and a second image with 3 or 4 balls on it, and the same resolution has another size……

    hmm, but guess what, as more I think about, I think you are right, it must be this point, like more balls –> more color information, bigger size of the image.

    hmmm…. however,
    thx a lot for all your minds and suggestions.

  • Omnidecay

    May 21, 2007 at 7:04 pm

    If you want to do the most standard of tests that will display this. Render an image with just a black solid, then render an image with the same black solid only now animate a text. Make them both the same size everything, the text will be a larger file.

    Editor>God

  • Bernhard Rieder

    May 21, 2007 at 8:40 pm

    yes, and I’v made another test, just saved a jpg file image pure white, after this I’ve added some spheres, shapes, color, shadows… and the image size pumped up…..

    never didn’t realized that…. thx a lot my friends.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy