161–170 of 215 posts
This is cool, but since all positional movement is on-rails, I find myself questioning their decision to use real-time rendering, as opposed to a pre-rendered video that users can scroll through. The latter approach would have allowed Getty to use higher quality models and lighting, and made the experience smoother on low-end devices, possibly at the cost of bandwidth. A conventional video would mean loosing the abil…
This is cool, but since all positional movement is on-rails, I find myself questioning their decision to use real-time rendering, as opposed to a pre-rendered video that users can scroll through. The latter approach would have allowed Getty to use higher quality models and lighting, and made the experience smoother on low-end devices, possibly at the cost of bandwidth. A conventional video would mean loosing the abil…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
weird - its very smooth for me on my non-pro 8GB m1 in safari...
This is why I ignore performance reports from Apple users. Unless it's something I can replicate on 100% of my test devices, it's not worth the time trying to figure out what weird configuration a some small percentage of a small percentage of users has.
This is really cool. Seeing these beautiful colors I realize how much how I imagine the ancient world is shaped by museum artifacts and photos in textbooks, which show raw and brown/grey/white stones, rusty tools and weapons. I've grown thinking about pre-medieval times as a landscape of ruins. It would be like if future humans were picturing our current world as nothing but bombed cities. It's a really cool project.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure? These scrolling things are normally designed for mobile. I gave up on the site on desktop because it involves so much scrolling . "Guys lets make a video but where you have to keep scrolling to make it play! That will be fun!" Impressive rendering and interface but they should have thought about the UI a bit more.
It's nice because scrolling is a 1d interaction, and the path you're navigating is 1d. It's superior to a movie because this scheme makes it super simple to control how long you spend at various points, and they open up optional interactions at various points. I don't understand why a lot of scrolling would be problematic, doesn't seem different then e.g. pushing arrow keys over and over when playing a video game.
In this website you need to keep scrolling, which is pretty monotonous, it would be equivalent of spamming "next" on an overly complicated late 2000s Windows software installer. Or watching a Youtube video by spamming the frame skip shortcut.
If you want to make a scroll interactive experience (please don't), then at least do the courtesy of having 1 scroll gesture = 1 piece of information, don't have users scroll their wheels like 6 times just to wade through a path slowly. Or at the very least support the page up/down buttons!
Look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ52fo5g03Q. I even accidentally skipped over some text sections because I was scrolling furiously to be able to go anywhere. Finally, I accidentally used the tilt key of my scroll wheel and it went to the previous page, and I had to start all over.
This is cool, but since all positional movement is on-rails, I find myself questioning their decision to use real-time rendering, as opposed to a pre-rendered video that users can scroll through. The latter approach would have allowed Getty to use higher quality models and lighting, and made the experience smoother on low-end devices, possibly at the cost of bandwidth. A conventional video would mean loosing the abil…
Wouldn't a pre-rendered video also force a single (possibly sub-optimal) experience across various form factors? > made the experience smoother on low-end devices, possibly at the cost of bandwidth Especially in the context of low-end devices, I don't think the cost of bandwidth should be discounted here.
Since they'd still be working from a 3D scene, they could easily render ten different videos (or twenty, or thirty) and send a different one depending on the device.
> Especially in the context of low-end devices, I don't think the cost of bandwidth should be discounted here.
I agree, which is why I'm not positive they did the wrong thing, I'm just skeptical.
The thing is, it's not as though their current approach is particularly light on bandwidth. They appear to be downloading many (all?) of the models and textures ahead of time, which makes sense, since it's hard to predict what will be visible in the viewport first. By contrast, videos naturally lend themselves to incremental streaming.
We're also pretty good at compressing videos these days, and a lot of AAA video games are significantly larger than even movies on BluRay (although I admit, I've never quite grokked how this can be.)
So, I'd be interested to see the bandwidth comparison. It's not entirely obvious to me which would win out.
Why's it slightly noisy? It never resolves to clean when the camera's still, so it doesn't seem to be MC noise for something like ambient occlusion or raytracing/pathtracing, so I assume it's just a 2D effect on top of the image for look?
This is cool, but since all positional movement is on-rails, I find myself questioning their decision to use real-time rendering, as opposed to a pre-rendered video that users can scroll through. The latter approach would have allowed Getty to use higher quality models and lighting, and made the experience smoother on low-end devices, possibly at the cost of bandwidth. A conventional video would mean loosing the abil…
I wonder if a hybrid approach would work well here to maximize both quality and bandwidth, using baked textures and similar techniques. The idea would be to generate the scene dynamically but use pre-calculated lighting, shadows, etc. as much as possible since the content is basically static.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. Better stolen than destroyed if you ask me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan
It was in stable condition until it was set on fire by a westerner and until part of the remains were stolen by other westerners. Plus the country would be a democracy today without western 1953 coup.
Dr. Mossadeqh was not running a "democracy". Post WWII Iran's political space was far more complex than the caricature presented since the fall of the Shah, and sans British instigated support for counter-coup to remove Mossadegh with help from USA, a quite significant chunk of Iranian military and society, including the Clergy (who were already using terror in Iran, btw), agreed with the American analysis that Mossadegh would merely precede a Soviet controlled Tudeh takeover of Iran.