# Flash size in Kb

**URL:** https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278
**Category:** flash
**Created:** [October 27, 2002, 10:30am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278 "2002-10-27T10:30:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![anon39631317](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e79b87/32.png) [@anon39631317](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/anon39631317)
#### Post date: [October 27, 2002, 10:30am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278/1 "2002-10-27T10:30:49Z")

</div>

I have a question regarding flash size, are they general smaller then animated gif’s? the flash (something) below shows as being 11k in size and the gif below it is 29k in size, it seems to me that the flash does a lot more than the animated gif but more than half the size, is this true? peeps at some forums complain that flash’s take to long to load but say not much on the animated gif’s.  
So are they wrong and in fact the below top sig is just what it say’s 11k?  
Bit confused here and thanks.

\<center\>\<EMBED src=“[http://www3.sympatico.ca/paulgilmour/something3.swf](http://www3.sympatico.ca/paulgilmour/something3.swf)” WMODE=“transparent” quality=“high” menu=“true” pluginspage=“[http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1\_Prod\_Version=ShockwaveFlash](http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash)” type=“application/x-shockwave-flash” width=“600” height=“70”\>  
\</EMBED\>  
\</OBJECT\>\</center\>

![](http://www3.sympatico.ca/paulgilmour/someut.gif)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/kirupa/original/3X/6/2/621e5c11736f46532526e61be85940af4230f3e5.png) [@system](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2002, 4:55am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278/2 "2002-10-28T04:55:37Z")

</div>

you are correct, generally for the same bang, Flash will be a smaller file size.

What I think you are referring to in regards to Flash-phobia, is that a lot of the Flash on websites is not optimized for file size, and on top of that, not really needed to broadcast the needed info. That said, if done properly, a Flash include on a website can offer so much more than a simple animated gif.

I hope I answered your question,

Rev:elderly:

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/kirupa/original/3X/6/2/621e5c11736f46532526e61be85940af4230f3e5.png) [@system](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2002, 9:11am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278/3 "2002-10-28T09:11:51Z")

</div>

Yes you did, thanks very much 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![system](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/kirupa/original/3X/6/2/621e5c11736f46532526e61be85940af4230f3e5.png) [@system](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2002, 10:17am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/flash-size-in-kb/7278/4 "2002-10-28T10:17:18Z")

</div>

I think the reason Flash files are smaller that animated .gifs is something to do with the tweening and frames. In either case, a tweened animation, where ou specify the start and end states, will be quicker than frame-by-frame, as it does the in between states on the fly and therefore doesn’t have to save them.

Plus I figure that Flash is designed to cope with this kind of thing and optimise accordingly.

PS: Rev - love the Kryten image. 🙂