Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
61–70 of 82 posts
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#62Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#63This is cool and I don't mean to disparage the work that went into it, but at the same time I hope nobody actually uses it because just plain old vertical scrolling web pages are way more practically usable.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#64To start out - I hate the pageflip effect. In the beginning, clients would drop the jaw to the floor when they saw the effect. They'd go into a coma when they saw you could drag the corners. We didn't have to do any sales beyond that - the effect alone sold it and the catalogs spread like wildfire. Sorry.
As time progressed, the pageflip effect alone didn't really cut it, especially as competition appeared. Since then we, as others, have gone in different directions, usually in the form of offering different addon modules, integration, etc. As time went on, the effect got diluted as well - we no longer offer the user the ability to actually drag the corners - usability testing proved that to be bad and cumbersome to use, instead you only get the option to flip the page by click big "Next/Previous" bars next to the catalogs. The effect is only seen while the pages flip automatically after an arrow click.
So why use the format at all? As many others say, normal scrolling is much more web friendly. However, there are billions of catalogs out there today, and millions more produced each and every day. Companies have hundreds of thousands of product manuals lying around, and they'd like to show them in a lightweight format that doesn't require you to download the 200mb PDF.
There are many retail chains that still send physical catalogs to your physical mail boxes each and every day. These catalogs are usually produced by print agencies on a weekly basis, and to also produce the same content in a webfriendly manner, that'd require tonnes of extra work. Instead, they can utilize what they're already producing and just put it online in an interesting format to read, for the common user.
To sum up - the flip effect was overused, but has now found a decent niche where it can be used. Lots of material warrant the format, even though it's not the optimal one.
I think turn.js looks very interesting. I have a boatload of catalogs running on Flash today, and I'd love to change that.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#65This is cool and I don't mean to disparage the work that went into it, but at the same time I hope nobody actually uses it because just plain old vertical scrolling web pages are way more practically usable.
I think so to, but usability research done by a partner company of ours showed, to their and our surprise, that "ordinary users" prefer this page turning effect.
because of course your users say they like the flashy effects, but you should never listen to your users when they say things like that. that's the sort of thinking that leads to sounds when buttons are pressed.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#66This is cool and I don't mean to disparage the work that went into it, but at the same time I hope nobody actually uses it because just plain old vertical scrolling web pages are way more practically usable.
I think so to, but usability research done by a partner company of ours showed, to their and our surprise, that "ordinary users" prefer this page turning effect.
You can easily, to the detriment of results, create an environment where people say they like something when really they like the impact the the thing had on them the first time ("oh, cool") when really they don't prefer it at all but the record only reflects their initial impression.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think so to, but usability research done by a partner company of ours showed, to their and our surprise, that "ordinary users" prefer this page turning effect.
I would question this result in almost every meaningful demographic. I've sat and watched people fail to discover non-standard navigation methods countless times in testing of products across 12-18 and 20-60 (students and teachers separately) every time one is provided as part of a supplier product. Unless there was some kind of conscious or subconscious prompting going on I would doubt that anyone would genuinely fa…
With such a common use of them, we can start looking at how to optimize the catalog format itself, rather than stick with the scrolling vs. catalog format discussion.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#68This is cool and I don't mean to disparage the work that went into it, but at the same time I hope nobody actually uses it because just plain old vertical scrolling web pages are way more practically usable.
I think so to, but usability research done by a partner company of ours showed, to their and our surprise, that "ordinary users" prefer this page turning effect.
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#69Nice effect, but the fact the page becomes blurry when I have my mouse over the "next page" button is annoying. I have to move the mouse away while reading and back when I want to turn the page. I'd prefer to just not move the mouse and roll a scroll wheel. (Actually, that's a lie - I'd rather not touch the mouse at all and just press j.)
I've seen many other CSS effects suffer from the same issue. This apparently happens when the element is rendered to a texture first and then applied to the screen using a filtered texture sampling (in the GPU).
Re: Turn.js - The page flip effect for HTML5
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a good alternative to Flash. I don't think people really advocate the effect as a replacement for normal scrolling paradigms. There are some specific cases where it might make sense to do it and it's great that those pages will no longer be forced into Flash.
> There are some specific cases where it might make sense to do it Like when your client demands it and you give in? I've used pageflip in the past and grew to abhor it. It's only quality is the cool factor, which we got over 6 years ago. I hate magazines that use it for their "digital" version.