 |
Author |
Topic: Platform, Architecture, Framework (Read 928 times) |
|
Martin
    
 
|
Platform, Architecture, Framework
« on: Dec 27th, 2002, 4:49am » |
|
"With the rapid advancements made in Flash there no longer was any reason to continue this line of work and thus was terminated." -- maedastudio.com, John Maeda referring to interactive greeting cards developed using Java.
It makes me wonder then... Why Proce55ing was developed using Java and why do efforts in Design and Computation tend to lean towards the likes of Java, C/C++, Python, among others? Why is it that Proce55ing was not just done using Flash?
Does this work like PostScript where PostScript is only an output interface to serve as a front-end?
Does this also boil down to a quote from Golan Levin where he writes... "Computers are capable of an unimaginably greater number of things than any specific piece of software might lead one to believe. I believe individual artists should dictate the possibilities of their chosen media and not some big companies like Adobe and Macromedia." ?
What can Proce55ing do that Flash can't?
Any inputs, thoughts, insights to this matter are welcome. 
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 27th, 2002, 4:50am by Martin » |
|
|
|
|
sportebois
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #1 on: Dec 27th, 2002, 2:38pm » |
|
Hi Martin,
Flash and Shockwave are really good for assembling/integrating/showacasing stuffs, not for 'scratch' creation.
Indeed I LOVE Director's imaging Lingo (see my articles on director-online.com about gaussina blurring in iL), but real-time pixel processing for the web is a no-go for shockwave, appart for small asset.
for exemple, I've done a clone of Meada color test (see Reactve Graphics History on maedastudio, or Maeda@media book), that you'll find (applet+src) on
http://sebastien.portebois.free.fr/eyecandy/
I've done this in only 2 hours.... To do this with Director (without using external xtras) could not be so fast to develop, and so fast at runtime! or you'll be forced to tweak, like prerendering the full image and use black masks over this... IMHO this is a perfect exemple of the power of p5 in pixel processing.
The other great side I see is the speed of vector drawing. Doing somehting like Golan Levin's yellowtail in Flash or in shockwave would be a pain, same thing for Ben Fry Valence... even if it would be possible (which I doubt), it would _never_ be smooth like the p5/java versions are on my crappy box (old Piii450).
And I'm awaiting sound synthesis in p5... this would be great!
indeed the perfect package I'd love to have (next XMas? ;¬)) would be p5 full (with sound synthesis) and a p5 wtra to play the java applet from within Director/shockwave, exchanging events/messages between Lingo and p5... that would be really great!!!
cheers,
séb
|
|
|
|
|
Martin
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #2 on: Dec 27th, 2002, 5:15pm » |
|
hi seb,
yup, i agree that running code directly would sometimes be faster especially on lower-end machines (i'm using a celeron 266). however, a lot of people out there are technologically spoiled  and much of those people are the audience of such. then again, there would be (more often than not) cases where flash would definitely be faster than java. i'd have to agree that shockwave director is bloated. however, flash (the output file) is not. for example, it's easier for a browser to load a flash movie via its flash plug-in rather than load a java vm first before loading an applet.
very nice rendition of professor maeda's reactive graphic.
jared tarbel had created something like that too using flash. please see http://www.levitated.net/daily/levMaedaReactive.html
and other renditions of professor maeda's work such as http://www.levitated.net/daily/levMaedaSections.html and http://www.levitated.net/daily/levMaedaKeyboard.html
speed aside, what new artform can p5 help achieve (yes, imagine! but we need a medium!) that is not possible using flash? 
people such as yugo nakamura and joshua davis have done things that people didn't imagine were possible in flash. is there that something that people cannot imagine (as of yet) that's possible using p5 (throw in subclasses) and not possible using flash (whatever you do, even if you are yugop or praystation caliber)?
what is that magic something that would make designers (except for the price) leave flash for a while and do things in p5?
a lot of the "creatives" out there tend to just look at the form and not the technology/code behind the form. although we know that it takes code and form to tango, a lot of people still can't see the light.
it all boils down to two questions: what can i do in p5 that i cannot do in flash? why do i have to use p5 when i got flash? (sorry for being redundant)
and yes, valence is faster done in java than in flash
am looking forward to sound too
personally, i love p5 because i can see everything that's happening and i have total (well, almost) control.
thanks! cheers!
---
where reason ends, faith begins.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 27th, 2002, 5:18pm by Martin » |
|
|
|
|
Mike Davis
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #3 on: Dec 28th, 2002, 7:45am » |
|
A big differance is that Proce55ing, being Java, is a full programming language, while ActionScript is not. ActionScript is limited by what libraries and objects are made available, and is (accordingly) centered around media. A general programming language like Java, by contrast, lets you do anything.
With ActionScript, you've got to wait until a need is observed for the functions that fulfill that need to be provided: a user couldn't write a function to play mp3s, only wait for them to be added. But a programming language doesn't constrain the user like that, so it's ideal for the creation of new, novel abilities. I think that's what Golan Levin was getting at.
It's also easier to build a big project in Java than ActionScript, in my opinion.
It may be that Flash can do anything P5 can do, with enough work and hacks. It's also possible to do everything Flash can do with assembly language ... fundamentally, a computer language may be the best available solution to a problem, but it will never be the only solution.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 28th, 2002, 8:04am by Mike Davis » |
|
|
|
|
Martin
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #4 on: Dec 28th, 2002, 11:58am » |
|
hi mike, great input. appreciate it.
i just have to make a quick note: you can write a function in actionscript that plays mp3 ... and other functions as well. for example...
function music (volume,musicname) {
sound1 = new Sound();
sound1 = setvolume(volume);
sound1.attachSound("musicname");
sound1.play();
}
so i can call: music(50,trance);
note: trance is the identifier name you place in the symbol linkage properties
good to compare this with java's media framework
hhmm... one advantage i see of java over flash is the size of the source.
i guess it's a matter of choice then on what language/tool a person wants to use in order to make an abstract thought realized. perhaps the important thing is for someone to be able to do things with 360 degrees of freedom and not be limited with the constraints that a certain technology might have.
|
|
|
|
|
gaza
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #5 on: Dec 31st, 2002, 6:01pm » |
|
Martin, I've just started using p5.. and agree with you in that I'm not sure about what things couldn't be done in flash that can be done in p5. But yesterday I was discussing with a friend that maybe the one thing I like in p5 that I can't have in flash is the Pixel control (something great for drawing) instead of having to either create an Empty MovieClip and from there start creating vector graphics. It's been great for me to be able to have real control in pixel drawing with p5.
Not sure I agree that writing in actionScript is more complicated. (I'm not much of a programmer though... but anyway).
_g.
|
|
|
|
|
Glen Murphy
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #6 on: Jan 1st, 2003, 2:34pm » |
|
I've found what most impresses Flash users about Java is it's raw speed - on 1Ghz+ machines, Java generally has no problem handling 5,000+ independant particles in three dimensions, whereas Flash would choke and die quite horribly under the same circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
tomek
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #7 on: Jan 22nd, 2003, 1:01am » |
|
Well, the comparison between Flash and Proce55ing should go beyond the specific features - there are other issues to be considered as well. Both platforms have something to offer that the other one does not.
Here are a few thoughts:
Plugin issues: Flash plugin is very well distributed, while Java plugin support is not and quite troublesome across various OSs and browsers. So if you're building your design portfolio and you want everybody in the world to see it Flash is a safer bet...
Cost: Flash is NOT free, while Proce55ing is. This is a serious issue when looking for adoption in verious educational institutions.
Programming Language: ActionScript especially since the Flash MX release became a fairly powerful and well featured language, but it is nowhere near the sophistication, clean design and feature set of Java. Also Java seems to be becoming (became?) the language of choice for Computer Science departments all over. Starting one's education with simple Proce55ing play is an excellent introduction into potential professional path in 'serious' computing.
Market Value: (not a good title...) What I want to point out is that if you're a designer and your MAIN goal is to learn something very practical that will get you a job learning ActionScript is a VERY valid option. Designers who can use Flash as a graphic tool and ALSO make things 'happen' with some ActionScript are often very welcome addition to commercial studios. On the other hand if you're looking MAINLY for education, expanding your horizons, experimenting with a new medium then Proce55ing is probably a better starting point. I think it exposes you to more potential avenues on your journey as a computational designer.
The Tools: Flash is a combination of an authoring tool and a programming language. Proce55ing is only a programming language. Certain (computational design) projects can benefit from the fact that NOT everything has to be computationally drawn. For example you might want to draw certain elements 'by hand' and then manipulate them using a programing language. Flash lets you do that (and also start by importing elements from other tools/formats).
Learning Curve: I think Proce55ing is a winner here. You can probably give a beginner a half an hour introduction, a few examples and they can start playing, experimenting, learning anf evolving on their own. ActionScript is NOT that easy to use and learn. Also in case of using it for strictly computational design the authoring tool and it's timeline get in the way and confuse beginers...
Resources: There are about two, maybe three solid, proper books on ActionScript programming - the rest is either minimal or not very educational (programming wise). There are none on Proce55ing, but since it is based on Java and you can write extensions using such, there is a HUGE library of not only language specific literature, but also programming methodology, software development, patterns, computer graphics, etc... all VERY applicable for learning Proce55ing.
Features: You can do things with Proce55ing that you can't do with Flash/ActionScript and vice versa. Examples? ActionScript does not allow for bitmap control on the pixel element level which excludes possibilities of images processing applicatons. ActionScript has certain buit-in features that although possible in Proec55ing/Java they are not that easy. Text manipulation, editing including HTML rendering are examples here. Also Flash movie can be embedded (and interact with) CD-ROM productions created with Macromedia Director. There is no clear winner here - it all depends on the specific project.
Summary (still only my opinion): I think that the creators of Proce55ing made an excellent choice by using Java as a base language. My understanding is that it was meant as an academic/learning/experimental tool and it looks like it can be very successful by exposing students to the concepts and possibilites of computational design. It has no chances of competing with Flash in the commercial setting of the Web, though, due to various reasons. The primary one is bad support of Java in the browsers. My feeling is that learning Proce55ing can widen your horizons as a designer/artist/creator while knowledge of Flash/ActionScript is more likely to pay your bills. So, if you can, learn both!!! Either side by side or in order. If you can master one, you can master the other. You will benefit from both...
Final note: the above comments are far from being complete on the topic - they are drawn from my personal experiences of learning (computational) design and creating commercial web projects. I wrote them mainly to provide some hints for students trying to decide where to invest their time.
|
|
|
|
|
jand
|
Re: Platform, Architecture, Framework
« Reply #8 on: Mar 16th, 2003, 6:04pm » |
|
In the beginning was the Pixel, and the Pixel was good...(pity no-one told Macromedia...)
At a very basic level, P5 gives you complete control of the display; Flash, despite the recent scripting advances, is stuck in vector-land (which can be programmed with P5 anyway...)...
Speed is a big issue - I had to limit my Game of Life simulation to 15 x 15 or so just to get decentish performance. A lot of alife system rely on having many independent actors running simulatneously, Flash just chugs & the endless optimization one has to do are a real creative drag... You only need look at the P5 GoL example to see that P5 can handle so much more.
The look is an issue as well. Flash is always so identifiable, akin to always painting with the same brush.
(yes, you guessed..I'm very excited by P5...it reminds me of the feeling I used to get when I first started programming on the ZX Spectrum - a similar sense of being close to the machine...A new year 0...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
