Creating Interactive Brochure for the Web

I am trying to find a way to create an interactive brochure with page curls, hyperlinks, printable, etc. Is this possible using Adobe software?
I thought it would be something you would create in Flash or Fireworks, but can't seem to find any info on it. I know you can create a primitive one in Indesign to a certain extent, but I am looking to add more that that to it.
Also, I created an interactive brochure from Indesign, but the file is about 6MB and loads very slow on the web.
I am just look for some input or advise in creating this kind of document.

I don't know how to make page realistic page curls but you could create a small page curling animation in the corner that is actually a button to the next frame.

Similar Messages

How to create clean text for the web in Photoshop/Illustrator

I am puzzled to death on how in the world to get clean text for the web in Photoshop/Illustrator, particularly white text. I want my text to turn out exactly like the text at this website: thepainteddoor.org
If you scroll down to the bottom of that page, notice the titles "Featured Media", "Social Networking", and "Contact Information". They are all .gif images. I have tried to replicate what these images look like for about 3 hours now to no avail. Can anyone tell me how to do this? It just looks like a simple outline or drop shadow, but I can't get it to show up like that. If someone could help me replicate that effect with text (aka make it show up clean as an image), I would graciously give them money through PayPal*.
* = I will only give cash if it will replicate it exactly (and I mean exactly)..and it won't be too much..I'm a poor college student. :-P
Thanks in advance!
Thomas

You would do it the way I created it:
Select the Text tool in Photoshop and set the font and parameters as I have listed. Then enter whatever text you like. It will be rendered over the top of the lower layers you may have in the document. Save as an image of the appropriate type and you're there.
Note that "lower layers you may have in the document" could conceivably be none at all (i.e., you render the text over a transparent document). You could imagine saving that as a .png with transparency and get light text in an image that could then be put over the top of anything else. The alpha mixing will see to it that the edges smoothly blend with the background. I haven't actually tried this (I usually do try my own suggestions) because of lack of time right now.
-Noel
Edit: Markerline and I seem to be on the same crystal-controlled wavelength.

I used my key note to create a banner for the web. When I play it on my iphone or ipad the control panel shows and I have to operate it manually.Is tere anything to fix this problem?

I have used keynote to create a banner with transitions.
It plays OK on the web but doesn't play on the iphone or Ipad, unless i hit the control panel.
I configured it for loop and self playing and that works fine in Chrome and Safari with no control panel visible.
What can I do to resolve the problem and get it to work on iphone and ipad?

This is the Mac discussion, I believe you need the iOS Discussion.

What's the fastest way to create simple report for the web?

I have Developer 6i and Oracle 9I installed.
If i have a report already done, how can I make it available to users, so they can access them thru an IP or a host?
can I achieve that just with my developer 6i (report builder) and my database (oracle 9i)???
If so, how?

1) pls see
[     Publishing reports to web - 10G ]
see
[    All Docs for all versions    ]
for 9i version of same document
2) Better to have 9i builder - 9i ias combinations
(not sure whether other combination is supported or not. but understandably it is best to have same combination]
[    All Docs for all versions    ]
http://otn.oracle.com/documentation/reports.html
[     Publishing reports to web - 10G ]
http://download.oracle.com/docs/html/B10314_01/toc.htm (html)
http://download.oracle.com/docs/pdf/B10314_01.pdf (pdf)
[   Building reports - 10G ]
http://download.oracle.com/docs/pdf/B10602_01.pdf (pdf)
http://download.oracle.com/docs/html/B10602_01/toc.htm (html)
[   Forms Reports Integration whitepaper 9i ]
http://otn.oracle.com/products/forms/pdf/frm9isrw9i.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recomended configurations for creating video for the web

I'm working on a project creating video segments for the web (no plans for broadcast of DVD) and I'm looking for opinions on the most efficient way to use FCP to do this. We are shooting with an HD camera with a green screen and composting a couple of additional layers of Motion graphics and we found that the render times were really long. I'm looking for ways to mitigate this, on thing we did was switch from shooting in 1080p to 720p. We also tried shooting at 24fps instead of the broadcast 60fps and that cut our render time by a good percentage. Since the final product is going to be 640 by 360 at 15fps it seems like a good trade off but are there any down sides I'm not thinking of.
I was also wondering if there might be an advantage to working at the size of the final product, if the FCP sequence were 640 by 360 would there be any advantages in terms of render times and what might the disadvantages would be.
This is my first semi-professional project, just been a hobbyist up until now so any advice is appreciated.

MoSaT wrote:
We are shooting with an HD camera with a green screen and composting a couple of additional layers of Motion graphics and we found that the render times were really long. I'm looking for ways to mitigate this, on thing we did was switch from shooting in 1080p to 720p. We also tried shooting at 24fps instead of the broadcast 60fps and that cut our render time by a good percentage.
those simple steps reduced the number of pixels in each frame from about a million to 750,00, about 25%; and you reduced the number of frames from 30 or 60 to 24 or 48. So, yeah, your rendering times are going down. If your Motion project has ten HD layers you're saving tons of processing.
MoSaT wrote:
This is my first semi-professional project, just been a hobbyist up until now so any advice is appreciated.
Since the final product is going to be 640 by 360 at 15fps it seems like a good trade off but are there any down sides I'm not thinking of.
Absolutely. But you engaged the project without knowing how you were going to accomplish anything; implies your plans for improving workflow will be similarly incomplete. We all got by with NTSC and plan ol' DV for decades. The web is a low end distribution system, not a theatrical viewing experience. You can force your viewers to download a huge file and watch it on their TVs or you can open it up in weensy teeny window on their iPhones.
MoSaT wrote:
I was also wondering if there might be an advantage to working at the size of the final product, if the FCP sequence were 640 by 360 would there be any advantages in terms of render times and what might the disadvantages would be.
Purists will be correct in telling you better source footage results in better uploads. I will tell you that's true but it's academic. Your realworld needs are based on your web upload, not your plans to archive high def footage for future exploitation.
Here's what I'd do: Work backwards. Figure out what your upload needs are--exactly. Research Compressor and other compression systems to determine how you are going to process your project to get the target output. Now decide what format that software wants to process to create the best results. then figure out how you want to provide that input for the compression application. then figure out what the tradeoffs are for your original footage in terms of your camera resources, your skills with the camera, and your mistaken impression that effects and chromakey should be fast.
bogiesan

Getting complete WSDL for the web services created in J2EE

Hi,
I have created a web service using Netweaver developer studio for a J2EE project (complete EJB, WEB and Appln Project) similar to CAR rental application.
I also have tested the web service in web service perspective and it is working fine. Now i want to call this web service from XI. Therefore i need the WSDL for the same. The testing screen also gives the WSDL for the web service. But it has got number of links inside in the forms of import.
Editing all those documents and forming the complete wSDL is very difficult..
How do i do it??
Abhijeet

Hi,
When I opened the wsdl it has number has a wsdl:import location tag..which refers to binding.
when opened this import location we have one more import location for porttypes.
When combined all thhree e.g. service, binding and porttype we get the complete WSDL which i could comofortably import in XI and further process.
This way i coudl succesfully call a web service from XI.
I used Stylus studio for editing WSDL.
Thanx

Why can't font graphics for the web be created with sophisticated "hinting" in Photoshop?

It seems when a font is generated as a web graphic -- either a GIF or a high quality JPEG -- it never looks as clean as live fonts in HTML? I've been researching fonts a bit, and apparently they come with built-in "hinting" that makes them appear better on screen. But if you set the same type in Photoshop or Illustrator and export for the web, it's blurrier and never as good. Is there a way around that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering

HD video compressed for the web

I was doing some testing trying to figure out the best way to compress the HD video I get from the Sony XDCAM HD for the web (streaming). I shoot in HD (1080/30P) because it's needed for our videos. The web streaming is secondary.
I would prefer to make the web videos .flv because it works best and most easily cross-platform. In the real world, the majority of users have Windows PCs, which made me hesitant to use h.264 (.m4v) because it probably would require the average user to download things they may not wan to. Nonetheless, it has to be viewable on all computers in all browers.
So, I took three 10 second clips of steady camera video with audio from the camera that I used in all tests. I will refer to them by clip number...
Clip 1: 30P 16:9 High quality, 10sec=45mb
Clip 2: 30P 16:9 Low Quality, 10sec=24mb
Clip 3: 60i 16:9 High Quality, 10sec=45mb
First I tested making FLV is Adobe CS3 Encoder using the High Quality (700) setting.
Test 1 used size 848x480 (16:9)
Clip 1: 1.3mb
Clip 2: 1.1mb
Clip 3: 1.2mb
Comments: Looked very crisp, audio was clean, slightly darker image than original on default settings
Test 2 used size 480x270 (16:9)
Clip 1: 1.2mb
Clip 2: 1.1mb
Clip 3: 1.1mb
Comments: Looked very crisp, audio was clean, slightly darker image than original on default settings
Next, I tested making .m4v using the h.264 iPod settings in Compressor.
Test 1 used size 640x370.
Clip 1: 240kb
Clip 2: 1440kb
Clip 3: 204kb
Comments: Image wasn't quite as clean as the Flash files, but still good. Much lighter/brighter than the Flash files also. Low Quality HD video had high file size... why? I don't know, but I don't shoot on LQ for things anyway.
Test 2 used size 320x180.
Clip 1: 160kb
Clip 2: 865kb
Clip 3: 865kb
Comments: Image wasn't quite as clean as the Flash files, but still good. Much lighter/brighter than the Flash files also. Low Quality HD video had high file size... also the 60i file...why? I don't know.
In conclusion, I'm lucky that I shoot 30P since it worked well in all areas. The h264 codec provides a much smaller file size than Flash, with a good image. Amazing considering we started with a 45MB clip. What are the standards for aspect ratios for putting 16:9 video on the web? I haven't heard much set in stone like you have for 4:3 video. Nonetheless, the 640x360 or 480x270 seem to be a nice size for most uses.
I have heard that in Flash 9 you can chance the m4v extension to flv and it will work. IF that is true, that would be great because now my concern is that a base Windows PC cannot play these .m4v images without plugins/codecs. I suppose right now its a tradeoff between smaller file size/less compatibility with h264 or larger file size, great compatibility with Flash.
Any comments or suggestions to help out would be great. I typed this fast so forgive me if I left out any important info.

Hi APPLE27:
One comment from your post that immediately caught my attention was this, "Nonetheless, it has to be viewable on all computers in all browsers."
Unfortunately, it is unrealistic to expect one digital video file to be viewable on "all computers in all browsers" as there are simply too may variations in both hardware and software.
A common approach when offering digital video is to provide two formats to choose from and then within each of those two formats a few versions of the video for different bandwidths.
For example, a web site might offer Video for Windows and QuickTime. For each of these, there would be a low bandwidth Video for Windows file and QuickTime file and a high bandwidth Video for Windows file and QuickTime file (four files total). Of course, there's also Flash Video, Real Video, MPEG1, and so on.
For better or worse, YouTube.com has allowed video content creators the realistic expectation of creating a digital video file that is viewable on "most computers". But, the video is unavoidably tied to that web site.
When it comes to online distribution of video, it's still very open ended.
Also, computers are not all that's out there. Mobile devices are a huge market and you'd be hard pressed to create a single digital video file that will play on all mobile devices (iPhone, iPod Touch, Palm Treo, Sony PSP, etc.) either from local storage or from a mobile browser.
QuickTime offers a solution for creating a referencing movie - one file that links to other digital video files, but it too is imperfect at best when it comes to reaching the broadest audience possible.
With my few comments here, I'm just scratching the surface. But, it all starts where you are right now: caring about the image quality when exporting from your edited master.
-Warren

Best way to save HQ video for the web?

What´s the best settings for great video-quality for the web?
I have a 5 min long clip I´d like to put on my website.
I would like it to be 480x360 and with good quality. It´s ok if the file gets 30-40 MB.
I have tryed the Expert Settings, Quicktime Movie, Broadband - High, but the movie gets "striped".
What´s wrong?
A lot Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Hi Magnus40,
I'm not sure what you are doing to create this problem. I create web movies all the time and have never had this problem, although, I never use the advanced settings cos I have never had to. When you go to the Quicktime export pane in iMovie you have the quality choices from full quality to web. When you select one of these it gives an estimate of the file size. For that length clip you should not need to use any setting besides full quality. I'd say the problem is coming from the 480x360 aspect ratio. This is what is compressing the file. Have you tried exporting it as full quality and then uploading it? The only problem you face by doing this is, it will take a long time for the movie to load on your website. For a short clip you may find that the CD ROM setting is sufficient.
Good luck.
SR

Advice on saving DVD video and re-sizing for the web

Hello...
I'm looking into purchasing a copy of Adobe Premiere - but I need advice on which version I need - and if it can do what I'm after.
I want to transfer my own video work from DVDs and save them as MPEG4 files. I then want to upload them on to my website. They'll be about 10 minutes each each DVD will have several videos on them.
Is Adobe Premiere able to do this...? If so which version would suit me best? It's simply to do the above with no editing, just re-sizing for the web and saving as an MPEG4 file.
Thank you for your help and time in advance.
philip

For web video creation, I use a program called V2F. It creates Flash rather than mp4, but if you're not stuck on that format, the files are very good quality.

OUTPUT PNG W/ Alpha for the web?

Hello to everyone.
I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this...
I need to output my file as a PNG with an ALPHA Channel for the web. First, I created an alpha for my image, and then I tried to simply use the "save as" function and select the PNG format, but the ALPHA selection is grayed out. I've also tried "the save for web function" and selected transparency, but when I reopen the file the alpha channel has dissappeared. I know that it is possible to save an alpha channel to a PNG, but I can't seem to do it with Photoshop... Can anyone help?
Thanks in advance.
Bryce

Hello Zeno Bokor
Thanks for your reply.
In fact, my client, who is using the images for a web game that they are developing, requested that the files have an Alpha channel. They have explained that the alpha channel helps the video program understand what areas are transparent.
I wish that it was just a case of transparency... It would be hell of a lot easier.
Any ideas?
Thanks again.
bgub.

Best way to encode Quicktime file for the web?

Hello all and thanks in advance for your help with this problem.
I need to know the best way to encode a quicktime clip for the web.
This was my first try:
http://www.denmothers.net/trailer-big.htm
It works fine in safari, firefox, and ie for mac, provided they have quicktime 6 or later but it seems not to work on pc browsers. The file is encoded as an .mp4 using compressor and played with the browser's quicktime plugin. I've read that encoding files as a .mov provides greater compatibility but when i compress it as a .mov using the mpeg4 codec the file sizes are huge and when i use the photo-jpeg codec the quality is poor. h.264 looks great and has low file sizes but then my viewers have to have quicktime 7 which i think is too limiting because many will have older computers.
How should I encode my file such that it works best across browsers and platforms and has the highest quality at the lowest size?
Best,
Keegan

If you open an .mp4 file in quicktime pro you can then select File->Save-As and you are presented with two options:
Save as self-contained: This will create a .mov that is the same size as your .mp4 but is playable on any system w/ QuickTime 6 and the Mpeg-4 codec. (PC's included).
Save as reference: This will create a small (>500kb) file that will simply reference the .mp4. If they're in the same folder the .mov created will open the .mp4. Without the .mp4 the .mov in this case is useless.
For what you're trying to do I suggest going with self-contained.

Disappearing color profile when saved for the Web

Hello.
I have a problem with the “Save for the Web” results using Photoshop CS6 running on Win 7 x64.
My photos are already in 8 bits and in sRGB and when I save for the Web I check the option “embed color profile”, uncheck “convert to sRGB”, metadata to “copyright and contact info”.
When I open the resulting photos in Photoshop, everything is fine as it recognizes the embedded color profile. Same thing when I open these files in Firefox, Safari or Chrome: the colors are correct.
Now, when I right-click on a file in the Win Explorer and look its properties, the line about the color profile is blank, as if there wasn't any. This doesn't bother me but the problem appears on my Website created with Joomla and using for the display a module, Responsive Image Gallery, which creates resized copies of the photos. At this point the copies have completely lost their color profile. I entered in contact with the module's support and they assured me that it preserves the embedded profile, so I come here to gather some information about how this “Save for the Web” embeds the color profile because may be I just didn't understand how it does and if it's different from the “Save as” way.
The fact I can't see the profile through the Win Explorer makes me think Joomla's module doesn't either.

Incredible how much gballard's site is famous! Lol. I use it for a while now and checked again right now with the three Web browsers and everything is all right.
As indicated in my first post, when saving for the Web I checked the “embed color profile” option. I already resized the file and converted it in sRGB first in Photoshop.
Yes it's pretty confusing to see some software not able to see the color profile when the file is saved with that option.
To illustrate, here are three screenshots from Windows' file browser => right-ckick on the file => properties => details:
Opening that “saved for the Web” file in PS, it's ok, the CP is recognized.
Opening it directly (from the file browser => “open with”) in Web browsers: ok in Firefox, Safari and Chrome (CP recognized in all).
Copying that file in my working site on localhost (no modification), integer it in Joomla's module gallery (which is CP aware) and then opening my site on localhost with Web browsers: ok in Firefox (because it considers a non-tagged file by default as beeing sRGB), NOT OK in Safari neither in Chrome.
Now, if I do the same with the “Save as” version of the file with embedded sRGB CP:
PS: ok
Opened directly in Web browsers: ok in the three cases
Opened in Web browsers through my Joomla site on localhost: OK IN ALL THREE BROWSERS
Good point gator_soup: I'll post a bug report. I'm new here on the forum and thought Adobe's staff would post here.

AdobePRO bad for the web?

Ive been using AdobeRGB as my working color profile for a long time. I didnt notice that the default working space for Lightrooms RAW conversions was AdobePRO. Consequently Ive got a bunch of files now with the PRO color space. I didnt notice any difference between the two spaces on my PC they look identical.
BUT, on uploading a file to onemodelplace.com (a modeling portfolio site) I noticed the AdobePRO images had the color washed out not completely, but about 50% of where it was supposed to be. Uploading the same image converted as AdobeRGB looks fine.
Whats going on here is there a problem at onemodelplace or are AdobePRO files useless for the web?

When you create a Lightroom Web Gallery the images are automatically converted to sRGB!
When/If you export images you can select your colour space.
Note that sRGB is an ideal, not all monitors are capable of displaying sRGB. Not all monitors are colour managed and even better only 2 browsers support colour management, Safari in IE for Mac.
Richard Earney
http://inside-lightroom

Crystal Viewer for the Web

Hello,
We are currently attempting to use Crystal reports out on our web, the reports are static and we were told that there is a free viewer down load for the web, is this current? If so where would you be able to provide me the link? I have also been told that there are only 3 threads available if we use the Viewer, which I believe indicates that we can only have 3 consecutive users, is this also true?
Thanks for your time.....

Just as an FYI, htere is a forum for SDK developers (.NET Development - Crystal Reports;
SAP Crystal Reports, version for Visual Studio) that will be better to post to in the future.
To create a web app in.NET you will need to reference the Crystal Reports assemblies for .net, place the viewer on your form, code the report path and any database logon parameters as well as any other code that you need to run the report (selection formulas, parameters, etc., etc.). For more resources re. developing with Crystal reports in .NET see the following:
http://devlibrary.businessobjects.com/BusinessObjectsXIR2SP2/en/devsuite.htm
C:Program FilesBusiness ObjectsCrystal Reports 11.5Helpencrsdk_samples_aspxdatacrsdk_net_tutorials_115_en.zip
C:Program FilesBusiness ObjectsCrystal Reports 11.5Helpencrsdk_net_docdoccrsdk_net_doc.chm
http://www.businessobjects.com/global/pdf/dev_zone/VS2005_Walkthroughs.pdf
https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100006252822008E/net_win_smpl.exe
https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100006252712008E/csharp_web_smpl.exe
https://smpdl.sap-ag.de/~sapidp/012002523100006252812008E/net_web_smpl.exe
http://www.businessobjects.com/jump/xi/default.asp
Ludek

Creating Interactive Brochure for the Web

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for