Comments on: 3D Panorama in JavaScript

By: ujuxiun

ujuxiun — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:07:24 +0000

nice work, I prefer the flat 360 over the stepped tiles–which makes for a smoother animation too. About the only major benefit plugins give you with this is better performance but when you go flat the overhead is negligible (fewer tiles to animate). In fact in my previous attempts the flat javascript versions matched flash for overall experience. I’ve been wondering when someone would try to do the full vertical and horizontal 360 like quicktime but the effect isn’t as good a value as simple 360′s (at least for giving you a quick and cheap sense of being-there).

By: Schill

Schill — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:49:31 +0000

I was toying with a similar approach (many copies of an image shown at once) in attempting to make a "genie effect" similar to Apple's window zooming feature in OS X, but it turned out to be quite CPU-intensive of course, and oddly enough was slowest in IE; Firefox, Safari and Opera handled working with many images at the same time.

By: RobRobRob

RobRobRob — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:38:05 +0000

It’s a nice proof-of-concept but it wouldn’t make sense to use over a Quicktime VR. It’s just a QTVR panorama with a lot less functionality. However, it is nice it can be used if you don’t have any plug-ins installed.

By: mdmadph

mdmadph — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:34:54 +0000

wow — who needs flash? :p

By: starkraving

starkraving — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:25:54 +0000

Warning: do not watch the demos with any kind of blood alcohol level, heh

By: Robert Schultz

Robert Schultz — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:30:57 +0000

Well, first impressions are, ‘nifty’ :)
Might make sense on a webpage that needs panoramics (even if they are slightly lower quality) but wants to remain very lightweight.

It’s sad that the page linked ONLY works in Firefox.
It does not work in IE7, nor Opera, nor Safari (win32) nor Konqueror.

I understand it’s just a demo/prototype, but it would still be nice if people were to code such things to be as crossplatform as possible. Perhaps they are using Firefox-specific features, or perhaps not.