# 'Graphic' - Why does it still exist?

**URL:** <https://forum.kirupa.com/t/graphic-why-does-it-still-exist/72731>\
**Category:** flash\
**Created:** [December 8, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/graphic-why-does-it-still-exist/72731 "2004-12-08T19:54:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rasper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9fc29f/32.png) [@Rasper](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/Rasper)\
**Post date:** [December 8, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/graphic-why-does-it-still-exist/72731/1 "2004-12-08T19:54:47Z")

</div>

Hi there,

I’m wondering what the purpose of a ‘graphic’ in flash is.  
Everything which a graphic can do, can be done by using a movieclip …

The only reason I sometimes convert something to a graphic is because I want to add a tween to it. But when it’s a graphic it doesn’t have the same functionality as a movieclip. So when you plan on adding some fade, you quickly notice that your graphic comes short.

So I was thinking, why not dump graphics and use all movieclips?

Or does a movieclip take a considerable amount of disk space (kB’s), where a graphic doesn’t? Does a graphic use lesser rendering resources? Or is there perhaps another function to graphics that I’m not aware of?

Just wondering