HauntWorld Home - Forums Home - Live Chat - Find Haunted Houses - Hauntworld Magazine - Haunted House Supplies - America's Best Haunts - Find Vendors
Haunted House News - Haunted Tradeshows - Join Hauntworld Facebook - Hauntworld Twitter - Advertise - Contact Us

Thread: Motion Posters... Anyone Know How

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. Default Motion Posters... Anyone Know How 
    #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    8,868
    Check out this site... this is pretty cool a motion poster. Anyone know how to make one? http://youwillknowhername.com/
     

  2. Default  
    #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    500
    Just evenly spaced and timed gifs. Cake.
     

  3. Default  
    #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Lexington, KY.
    Posts
    95
    Yeah, just .GIF files that are spaced properly. Easy.

    -Tyler
    http://www.hauntdesignkit.com
    >Download free Google SketchUp collections made just for haunt owners and designers.

    Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/HauntDesignKit
     

  4. Default  
    #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    598
    If it's for a website, I recommend flash or HTML5/Javascript rather than just animated GIFs and HTML.

    Flash can hold up to 100 times more color information than a GIF (and in some cases also more animation) for a fraction of the bandwidth employed by gifs. It all depends, of course.

    In the case of the page you posted, it's accomplished with DIV layers, which give you total control over the spacing but you can do it with a table as well if they are evenly spaced, which is what I normally prefer to do since it's simpler than CSS+DIVs and I love simplicity.

    Now, if what you are looking for is a physical animated poster, there are alternatives such as lenticulars or laser-printed 3D images, which while not animated look way better than lenticulars in terms of 3D 'cause they lack the ridged texture, the blur and the choppy transition between "frames". There are also things like Parallax Barrier, which is similar to lenticular but not as broadly used.
     

  5. Default  
    #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Waverly, Iowa
    Posts
    651
    What you may not notice is that this is a link to a Tumblr blog.

    Tumblr is a blogging/image website extremely popular with kids these days. While flash would work, it wouldn't work in this case.

    I applaud their use of gifs and the fact that they're using a site that is so heavily saturated with their target market.

    Do any of you haunt owners use Tumblr? I know Scarehouse does but haven't seen many commercial haunts on there.
     

  6. Default  
    #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis, In
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    If it's for a website, I recommend flash or HTML5/Javascript rather than just animated GIFs and HTML.

    Flash can hold up to 100 times more color information than a GIF (and in some cases also more animation) for a fraction of the bandwidth employed by gifs. It all depends, of course.

    In the case of the page you posted, it's accomplished with DIV layers, which give you total control over the spacing but you can do it with a table as well if they are evenly spaced, which is what I normally prefer to do since it's simpler than CSS+DIVs and I love simplicity.

    Now, if what you are looking for is a physical animated poster, there are alternatives such as lenticulars or laser-printed 3D images, which while not animated look way better than lenticulars in terms of 3D 'cause they lack the ridged texture, the blur and the choppy transition between "frames". There are also things like Parallax Barrier, which is similar to lenticular but not as broadly used.
    Everything you just said I totally totally disagree with.

    1. Flash is out dated, bloated, memory waster that is being deapprciated because of the fact more people are moving to mobile and Flash is not supported by devices anymore. If your still making flash websites, your wasting money and energy to create a website that the majority of your visitors are not going to be able to use anymore. Don't believe me, load the site on a iPad or iPhone. It works because it's not in Flash. Why would you code two sites, one for mobile and one for desktop, doubling your time, energy and money?

    2. Trying to recreate this with HTML 5 / Javascript, your making way more work for yourself while also adding more memory to the header and page that will take longer to load and process, especially for those mobile users again on a low end device and 3G connection. Some even disable Javascript on their device for security reasons and to save memory / processing speed.

    3. The best and smartest way to do it is how they did it. Just using CSS and gif's. Your saving yourself time, energy, money and speed.
    News and event coverage from directly inside the Haunt Industry - http://www.hauntersdigest.com
    Get a Custom Branded Mobile App for your Haunted Attraction - http://www.hauntapps.com
    New Media Consultant, Web Designer & Developer - http://www.charlesterry.net
     

  7. Default  
    #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    500
    I agree with Relics. It loaded immediately for me on my iPhone with LTE.

    If it were flash, guess what? I wouldn't even be seeing it right now.
     

  8. Default  
    #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    598
    Quote Originally Posted by MovieRelics View Post
    Everything you just said I totally totally disagree with.

    1. Flash is out dated, bloated, memory waster that is being deapprciated because of the fact more people are moving to mobile and Flash is not supported by devices anymore. If your still making flash websites, your wasting money and energy to create a website that the majority of your visitors are not going to be able to use anymore. Don't believe me, load the site on a iPad or iPhone. It works because it's not in Flash. Why would you code two sites, one for mobile and one for desktop, doubling your time, energy and money?

    2. Trying to recreate this with HTML 5 / Javascript, your making way more work for yourself while also adding more memory to the header and page that will take longer to load and process, especially for those mobile users again on a low end device and 3G connection. Some even disable Javascript on their device for security reasons and to save memory / processing speed.

    3. The best and smartest way to do it is how they did it. Just using CSS and gif's. Your saving yourself time, energy, money and speed.
    1. Flash may be out-dated but nothing else would give you the level of interactivity and animation that Flash offers (except for Javascript+HTML5, which is just a lot of work).

    2. Recreating this in HTML5 with Javascript would take me roughly 15 minutes with Adobe Edge or similar software. And yes, I agree, it's not supported by Smartphones, only by iPads. But then again, most sites designed specifically for Smartphone look like something made in the early 90's, having all your website versions looking like that may be great for some but I personally like high-end stuff.

    3. The best and simplest way to do this is using animated gifs on a table. Sure, it's an outdated method, but it's the oldest trick in the book and most likely all browsers will render it correctly, while CSS has slight differences in the way it's rendered in different browsers.

    Now, I wasn't saying they did the wrong way, I was just offering options and like it or not flash is still one option if you want high end animated graphics. It all depends on what you want. Sure, that one works great for certain types of animated graphics, 'cause it's made out of mosaics, each one containing a fraction of the entire animation, each one containing a fraction of the data, working almost like a mechanical type of image compression without data loss and it's great, I really applaud and respect the decisions of that designer/webmaster. But if you want a single uninterrupted image or a longer animation, a giant animated gif will not cut it and an embeded video lacks the interactivity.
    Now, if you know a way of doing so, please let me know, I'd love to learn from you 'cause I was actually looking for alternative ways of making animated websites that would be cross-device compatible.
     

  9. Default  
    #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    598
    Oh and involving Tumblr or similar sites sounds like a great idea! I would've said Twitter a few months ago but it's not the rage anymore. Flickr and Instagram would be a great idea to use for the galleries to leverage on their popularity.
     

  10. Default  
    #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis, In
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    1. Flash may be out-dated but nothing else would give you the level of interactivity and animation that Flash offers (except for Javascript+HTML5, which is just a lot of work).
    HTML 5, JQuery, Javascript would give you the same amount of interactivity at half the time, memory, and speed. This is why Adobe is making Edge now and trying to position it as the new Flash. They've lost the war due to Apple, they know it and that's why it's going out. Same reason that Microsoft is depreciating Silverlight. Their dead technologies. I'm terrified of those designers / coders that don't yet realize that and are still trying to push Flash to their clients. And if you know that flash is on the way out and your still pushing it to your clients, I equate that to basically stealing money from them because your building them a useless website and you know it.

    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    2. Recreating this in HTML5 with Javascript would take me roughly 15 minutes with Adobe Edge or similar software. And yes, I agree, it's not supported by Smartphones, only by iPads. But then again, most sites designed specifically for Smartphone look like something made in the early 90's, having all your website versions looking like that may be great for some but I personally like high-end stuff.
    If you find a site that still looks like it's stuck in the 90's, that's the fault of the coder, they didn't take the time to design for mobile, and/or the site owners were thinking about the mobile last and are trying to run some wordpress plugin for mobile only users to save cash on a redesign. Many designers are building sites with responsive frameworks that keep the same design and style of their site over many different screen sizes depending on the device and that's how you should be building sites. For those who may want to understand what that is for their own websites, http://coding.smashingmagazine.com/2...ve-web-design/. If you have a good web designer, they are going to be planning your site with this in mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    3. The best and simplest way to do this is using animated gifs on a table. Sure, it's an outdated method, but it's the oldest trick in the book and most likely all browsers will render it correctly, while CSS has slight differences in the way it's rendered in different browsers.
    You ever heard of the saying, "If it's not broke, don't try to fix it."? If you know it's the best and simplest way to do it, then why are you trying to change it with Flash, HTML 5, CSS, Javascript or anything else that will run the risk of breaking on someones device causing it not to display correctly? Stay with what works and it supported universally. It save you time and energy and saves the client money because your not wasting their money coding something that will eventually break causing them to look bad and you look like a sub-par designer / coder because you didn't want to take the smarter simpler solution.

    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    ... Sure, that one works great for certain types of animated graphics, 'cause it's made out of mosaics, each one containing a fraction of the entire animation, each one containing a fraction of the data, working almost like a mechanical type of image compression without data loss and it's great, I really applaud and respect the decisions of that designer/webmaster.
    Again, then why are you suggesting a totally different incorrect way of doing something that will end up not working on a quarter of the devices being used by users? If your saying that how they did it is the right way (which is was), then why didn't you just say that to begin with? If you applaud their decision to do it right the first way, don't suggest a bad way of doing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by redcrowdesign View Post
    Now, if you know a way of doing so, please let me know, I'd love to learn from you 'cause I was actually looking for alternative ways of making animated websites that would be cross-device compatible.
    Start here, http://www.w3schools.com/html/html5_intro.asp

    Then Here, http://coding.smashingmagazine.com/2...ve-web-design/

    Then Here, http://jquery.com/
    Last edited by MovieRelics; 05-27-2013 at 09:42 PM.
    News and event coverage from directly inside the Haunt Industry - http://www.hauntersdigest.com
    Get a Custom Branded Mobile App for your Haunted Attraction - http://www.hauntapps.com
    New Media Consultant, Web Designer & Developer - http://www.charlesterry.net
     

Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •