Lights • Hacker News Board

Re: Lights

#41

Post by ck2 » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 8:50 PM UTC

Try changing LIGHTS.releaseBuild = true to false.

Interesting debug data.

This must have been a beast to build, sync and debug.

I'd like to see the author post a "making of" entry.

Re: Lights

#42

Post by ajsharp » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 8:51 PM UTC

Rad.

Re: Lights

#43

Post by kruhft » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:04 PM UTC

Crashed my browser, Linux Firefox 7.0.1...

Re: Lights

#44

Post by flink » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:05 PM UTC

Wow, it works for me with FF 7.0.1 and nouveau on Linux. A little laggy when I go fullscreen, sure but the last time I tried viewing WebGL FF told me that my 3D setup wasn't supported.

Anyhow, cool presentation. It's impressive to see how WebGL is progressing.

Re: Lights

#45

Post by toshiroy » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:07 PM UTC

nixarn wrote: post #6

Says it doesn't support my browser :S Got a new iMac with OSX Lion and tried with with both Chrome (15 beta) and Safari.

I'm using Chrome 14 on Lion and it works fine.

Re: Lights

#46

Post by hm2k » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:13 PM UTC

This really impressed me.

Re: Lights

#47

Post by jpulgarin » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:14 PM UTC

Doesn't work on Chromium 12.0 in Ubuntu 11.04

Re: Lights

#48

Post by 5hoom » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:26 PM UTC

WebGL is going to be huge very soon.

Developers that are fluent with the technology are going to be in high demand once more people know what you can do & stuff like this is what everyone wants.

Time to get reading!

Re: Lights

#49

Post by ranza » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:32 PM UTC

I love that none of the js code is minimized! Great use of Mr. Doob's Three.js library

For reference:

http://lights.elliegoulding.com/js/Config.js

http://lights.elliegoulding.com/js/Lights.js

Re: Lights

#50

Post by nickfrost » Thu, Oct 13, 2011, 9:34 PM UTC

watty wrote: post #31

citricsquid wrote: post #29

So uh, not to cause a fuss but why was the title edited? I can understand removing the word "impressive" as that is an opinion, but removing the explanation (interactive html5 / webgl presentation built with threejs) seems silly? How are users who casually browse news.yc supposed to look at this and have any clue what they're clicking? Titles that are descriptive should be more important than... well I can't think wh…

I agree - the only impressive thing about this is the technology.

What else is supposed to be impressive about this?