Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of nsitedesigns
nsitedesignsFlag for United States of America

asked on

recommended software to animation photos

I purchased cu30x software to animation images.  It works like junk.  Support is poor.   Have spent hours fighting with it.  Is there something else out there that would be a good alternative?  And yes, I did pay for the unlimited version not the free version.  I don't have time to learn flash (tried it once and didn't like it).  Am looking for a quick, down and dirty program to do the hard lifting  for me.

http://cu3ox.com/
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Loganathan Natarajan
Loganathan Natarajan
Flag of India image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
You say you don't like Flash / don't want to learn it, but there are ways to use Flash *without* having to learn it. There is plenty of 'stock' Flash content that you can use without even *owning* Flash. Have a look at these...

http://activeden.net/

http://activeden.net/category/flash/image-viewers/banner-rotators

Watch out for those that say 'xml' - this is just a plain text file that controls what content (images) you want in the player. If you can type, that's the only skill that you need to customise them.

Also watch out for those that say something like 'HTML fallback'. These recognise those devices (primarily Apple mobile devices) that can't play Flash, and offer an alternate version for them.
Try out animoto.com. I do that for building nice, animated slideshows for my photography. It's not really a programming component, though - it's just a nice application.
Avatar of nsitedesigns

ASKER

gr8gonzo,
Thanks but I need something that doesn't appear to be a video.  It is part of the design.

quizengine,
I heard flash doesn't work on phones.  Is that correct?

logudotcom,
I found a sample on your link search recommendation.  Might work.  will keep y'all posted.
Flash works on some phones (primarily better Android phones), but not all (famously iPhones).

If you want to target phones, and as wide a market as possible, you should not use Flash. I only suggested other Flash options because the original choice you made (cu30x) produces Flash output.

In my opinion, though, the tools and code available for making non-Flash 'cool stuff' are still quite primitive and / or complicated to program. So, if you choose to target phones, and use non-Flash methods, you will (at least at this moment in time, and again in my opinion) be producing content that looks less good than what people are used to seeing done with Flash.
DO NOT NOT NOT use Flash! No one on any version of iPhone, iPad, Touch, etc will be able to view your animation. Apple is doing a good job of killing Flash because of a disagreement between Adobe and Apple, which is infuriating that we the customers have to deal with the fallout. But the fact is that so many viewers won't be able to see it. I am not sure if Apple computers are affected by this, since I don't have an Apple computer.
I get tired of such black / white opinions? (i.e. the assertion to never use Flash)

Surely the best approach is a considered one - i.e. you choose the best tool to achieve your goals, rather than just 'religiously' adopting one position or another.

And before you write off Flash, think on these few points.

1. There are still lots of things that Flash does with ease that other technologies (HTML5 / CSS / Javascript / JQuery / Java) may either struggle with, or not do at all.

2. Maybe you want to cover as many platforms / people with a single piece of content, but in doing so you have to use a 'lowest common denominator' approach - and that means that your content won't sparkle (or at least not be as good as it could be)

3. Despite the rise of the smartphone, most web consumption is NOT done on mobile phones. That might be the behaviour of someone who uses the EE site, but most of the rest of the world doesn't behave that way... Most people still use a computer to access the Internet, and they've got Flash. There may come a day where web consumption may be done mostly on mobile devices, and on that day my advice would change, but we are not there yet...
(And with Android already having 75% of the smartphone market - and that growth is still accelerating - and most new Android handsets have Flash, maybe my advice wouldn't change?)

4. If you use newer technologies - i.e. HTML5, you chance to leave 40% of Windows users behind. Do you want 40% of the most widely used computer OS to not be able to access your stuff? (These are Windows XP users - if you don't trust that stat, ask me to explain it)

5. Finally, guess what the pros do? And when I say pros, I mean people who are serious about developing great content, and want to get it in front of as many people as possible, and are prepared to spend to do that? What do they do? They build *multiple* versions of their content, using whatever technology is right for each platform. If you don't have their budget to do that? Then my advice is to adopt the technology that will get you on as many screens as possible. And that technology (again, maybe for now) is still Flash.