9 replies to this topic

[ELeFevre]

I'm creating a presentation that's going to be shown at a major conference in about a week. I've created six different Dynamic Flash maps that need to be included in the presentation and I'm not sure if it would be better to link to the maps, embedd them, or go with static maps instead (despite all the work I've put into building the things)! Embedding a file takes about thirty seconds to do, but the quality of the graphics seems to vary each time you open the presentation. Sometimes the file looks great, sometimes it looks distorted.

There's a lot riding on the presentation so I hate to have it look like hell when it finally goes up. Any one have any experience integrating Flash maps and powerpoint? Any pointers on the best way to go about it? Erin

[Hans van der Maarel]

How about leaving the presentation temporarily to show the flash map in a browser or flash viewer? Just to be safe?

[ELeFevre]

Well, that's probably what I will end up doing. Loading a seperate webpage breaks the flow of the presentation (slightly)...
It doesnt seem like a big deal to you or I, but it does to the people who are giving the presentation. They want a smooth progression with no hiccups or breaks. Erin

[Nick Springer]

You can create hypelinks in the Powerpoint file to local versions of the Flash maps. That might minimize the disruption. Plus of you link to a Flash exe then you can avoid all the browser overhead, and just use the standalone plash player.

[Hans van der Maarel]

Erin,

I understand that (I've been there). Then again, I think suffering a slight disruption in the flow of the presentation is to be preferred over showing a garbled, distorted map.

[ELeFevre]

You can create hypelinks in the Powerpoint file to local versions of the Flash maps.  That might minimize the disruption.

That's a good idea. Take the safe road. Like Hans said, a brief disruption is better than a "garbled" map:) Anyone else really dislike Powerpoint?

This is a bit off topic, but because it has to do with Edward Tufte, I think the diversion is more than worthy. Here he is commenting on Powerpoint: Here's the link

My favorite line from the piece: "Audiences consequently endure a relentless sequentiality, one damn slide after another."

[Nick Springer]

An excellent alternative to Powerpoint is PDF. You can create interactive multi-page layouts in InDesign and then create a PDF. Then modify the PDF initial settings to open in full-screen mode. I think you can add Flash to the PDF as well (or soon).

[ELeFevre]

PDF is definitely the way to go. In this case, however, the organization I'm working with has absolutely no experience with Indesign and PDF. They were concerned about being able to update everything on their own after I leave (I'm moving in about two weeks.) Therefore, they wanted everything done in a format they can modify - Powerpoint.

[Martin Gamache]

Agree about PDF being superior but I think Tufte is a bit obsessive about this and has made PPT bashing his main goal the last couple of years.

Ultimately the fault lies with the user, not with the tool, even if PPT allows a user to make bad slides or presentations ultimately someone is making the decision to use them. I've seen very informative and graphically brilliant PPT presentations and many very bad ones. It never occured to me to blame Microsoft for the bad ones...just the people giving them.

[Nick Springer]

I've seen very informative and graphically brilliant PPT presentations

For a good example check out David Byrne's Envisioning Emotional Epistemological Information.

A quote from an article he wrote about this in Wired Magazine ("Learning to Love Powerpoint"):
"Although I began by making fun of the medium, I soon realized I could actually create things that were beautiful. I could bend the program to my own whim and use it as an artistic agent. The pieces became like short films: Some were sweet, some were scary, and some were mysterioso."

Ed Tufte wrote an opposing view in the same issue called "Powerpoint is Evil".