Should I use vector or raster graphics in Flash CS4 when manipulating 3d artwork?

Question

I've got a project that heavily utilizes the new 3d artwork tools in Flash CS4. My question is has anyone done any tests to see if Flash is quicker with raster or vector graphics? My SWF really bogs down on slower machines.

Thanks!

Answer 1

Typically vectors are smaller and download faster, but take more time to render. Bitmaps increase file size, but should improve playback speed and render time. I couldn't find an specific tests, but here's an intesting topic on Kirupa: http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87849

Answer 2

When you apply a 3D transformation to a display object, internally Flash renders that object into a bitmap and applies the 3D transformation to the bitmap. This feature is called bitmap caching, and until the contents of the object change, Flash will keep using the cached bitmap.

So for 3D-transformed contents, it makes essentially no difference whether the source object is vector or bitmap, as either way it will be rendered and cached. If the 3D effects are killing your performance, generally the best approach is to decrease the overall size of the transformed object - transforming large bitmaps is an inherently costly operation.

With that said, in the general case (when things don't have 3D transforms), bitmaps perform significantly better than vectors. Especially you'll find this to be true on mobile devices with low CPU specs. It's also worth noting that fonts (except device fonts) become vectors at runtime, so replacing a text field with a bitmap version of the same text will greatly decrease the CPU cost for rendering that text.

The flip side is, vector contents generally take up less working memory than bitmaps. Again, this is important on mobile devices where both CPU and memory tend to be limited.