Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

polarr.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 100 posts

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#41

Post by jawngee »

I hate to shit on your parade because this is pretty dope, but the title is disingenuous at best.

But I use Lightroom every day, and you might be faster but you aren't working at the same level of quality.

I loaded up a 16-bit TIFF and got an 8-bit JPEG as a result, which leads me to assume that you are downsampling to 8-bit to work.

Also, the results in polarr are way harsher then Lightroom, which is pretty common for non Adobe products. GIMP is especially harsh in contrast to Photoshop.

But even before getting into the color correcting stuff, you're already shifting color (I'm assuming you are ignoring the embedded color profile in the TIFF):

http://i.imgur.com/QKb42l5.png

Also, Lightroom is way faster making adjustments. I can see polarr "thinking" when I make adjustments (it gets pixellated and then clears up), while Lightroom does them in real time.

I couldn't get your curves to work.

No split toning.

Lens correction should be automatic and profile based. Lightroom will automatically fix distortions based on Camera and Lens model. Same with basic color calibration.

Again, I don't want to be discouraging, but I find the hyperbole kind of frustrating.

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#44

Post by hnriot »

I don't see it, the app works, but it's just a bunch of horrible filters a-la-instagram. They work fast but they are still nothing like Lightroom which does a lot more than ruin photos with filters. All the ones I tried degraded an image, not once did I see any improvement, it's either blowing out highlights, introducing color shifts, or expanding the range to lower contrast or compressing the range and crushing the contrast.

I guess it's cool that you can do this kind of thing, I'm sure Chromebook users will be happy, but photographically speaking, gag.

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#45

Post by bwang29 »

jawngee wrote: post #41

I hate to shit on your parade because this is pretty dope, but the title is disingenuous at best. But I use Lightroom every day, and you might be faster but you aren't working at the same level of quality. I loaded up a 16-bit TIFF and got an 8-bit JPEG as a result, which leads me to assume that you are downsampling to 8-bit to work. Also, the results in polarr are way harsher then Lightroom, which is pretty common f…

Awesome comment.

TIFF is not officially supported now and so far we can only output 8bit JPEG in html canvas through downsampling.

The downsampling is process "the thinking" part is controlled to be not hurting the user experience and it's different depending on your machine. For faster machines we can remove the thinking part but it would take up more memory (right now the footprint during processing is less than 20mb, consider this is a web app)

I agree Adobe is doing better in interpolation (the harshness) and we are working to improve that.

What OS and browser you're using? The curves and split toning works well on Mac Desktops.

We only have two developers working on this right now. Do you know where we can get lens correction profiles, is it publicly licensed?

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#46

Post by ChrisCinelli »

bwang29 wrote: post #4

Dev of Polarr here. I think the biggest thing that's missing from the current release is RAW image support which is technically difficult to do. We're right now having some success of extracting the thumbnail of RAW and do it on the client side only using JS, but editing the RAW is a lot harder and we're thinking about using some WebGL texture blending. Any thought/comment on this is welcomed and appreciated. (Not su…

The Polarr Editor is great and is a already more useful than Lightroom. What is relly compelling as $1B company is the vision in https://www.polarr.co/box

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#47

Post by simonmales »

jawngee wrote: post #41

I hate to shit on your parade because this is pretty dope, but the title is disingenuous at best. But I use Lightroom every day, and you might be faster but you aren't working at the same level of quality. I loaded up a 16-bit TIFF and got an 8-bit JPEG as a result, which leads me to assume that you are downsampling to 8-bit to work. Also, the results in polarr are way harsher then Lightroom, which is pretty common f…

If I was developing this, I would be stoked with this kind of feedback.

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#48

Post by bitL »

patrick73 wrote: post #42
bitL wrote: post #31

Just out of curiosity, how did you overcome slow HTML5 canvas' getImageData and pixel reading from an image affected by CORS (tainted canvas)?

with WebGL?

WebGL textures suffer from the same problem as shaders can be used to extract data. WebGL is hence using CORS as well. Do you say the performance penalty in WebGL is non-existing contrary to canvas?

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#49

Post by maguirre »

Slightly off topic. I have yet to be convinced that non-native applications is the way of the future? It seems like the current trend is to make everything run in the browser these days. I don't really have an argument against it but I just can't quite buy into it yet.

Re: Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor

#50

Post by alkonaut »

ChrisCinelli wrote: post #46
bwang29 wrote: post #4

Dev of Polarr here. I think the biggest thing that's missing from the current release is RAW image support which is technically difficult to do. We're right now having some success of extracting the thumbnail of RAW and do it on the client side only using JS, but editing the RAW is a lot harder and we're thinking about using some WebGL texture blending. Any thought/comment on this is welcomed and appreciated. (Not su…

The Polarr Editor is great and is a already more useful than Lightroom. What is relly compelling as $1B company is the vision in https://www.polarr.co/box

The point of using lightroom is Cataloging and RAW photo development. I can't see what's useful since the hyperbole mentions Lightroom. It's a program to develop RAW's (Even the name of the application is a pun on that)
Post reply on HN