wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: new promotional possibility - Fullscreen QTVR site
danheimsothdotcom 2006-Jul-18 12:17:00
--- In #removed#, "G. Donald Bain" <dbain@...> wrote:
>
> Dan,
>
> Others are voicing similar concerns.
>
> I personally don't like this sort of thumbnail, but it is the
> standard for the FullscreenQTVR site.
>
This is now a show-stopper for me, but more about that later.
> This is in no way a substitute for the WWP site. We have no plans
for
> major redesign of the WWP site - we are happy with it the way it
is.
> Of course there are details we can add, and some improvements will
be
> made, but it is a very logical and usable site design and has
been
> crafted to suit the needs of both our participants and our viewers.
>
My comment was only a "what-if", I didn't really think that WWP
would go away. I was trying to point out the problems with the FS
interface into a project as big as WWP. I also like WWP the way it
is and if I ever can suggest any improvements I will, but you folks
are usually 2 or 3 steps ahead of anything I can dream up.
> Fullscreen QTVR is a completely separate venture, part of VRWay,
> founded by Marco Trezzini and Hans Nyberg to promote fullscreen
QTVR.
> It is easy to see why they are anxious to include the WWP - the
> largest collaboration of VR producers and one of the largest
> collections of fullscreen VR's. I think this sort of cooperation
and
> mutual promotion is good for everyone.
>
> There are weaknesses in the Fullscreen QTVR site design - the
> navigation in particular is terrible. Try finding your own
panorama
> on the test site - an exercise in frustration. But this is
something
> that can be improved later.
>
> Similarly, we want viewers on Fullscreen QTVR to gravitate over
to
> the WWP site, but naturally VRWay wants to keep them on their
site. A
> balance needs to be struck.
>
> The question right now is the principle involved - do we want to
> allow thumbnails of the WWP to be used on another site - will it
help
> us or hurt us? Are there changes or additional requirements we
will
> need to ask for before approval?
>
> Don
>
I'm still concerned about the limitations of the FS site interface,
but I think some of the suggestions already offered here (I like the
idea of a small sample with pointers to the real WWP site) could
address that. But as the sample site stands now I would definitely
opt-out. The reason is thumbnails. I don't know how they are
generating them, but I took the time to dig thru the pages until I
finally found my "Best of" entry, and I definitely will not approve
of my name being listed with that image. The thumb is bad enough,
but the banner on the top of the page is cycled thru all the images
on the page, and it is even worse and much larger. I've learned a
lot lately about making panos and that one is no longer my best, but
it wasn't as bad as they're making it look, and I won't allow my
name to be listed under that mess. And I don't think it's just my
image. Some panos just don't work well with whatever thumb
generator they are using. If you want to see for yourselves, here's
the direct link to save you the wading thru that interface:
http://www.fullscreenqtvr.com/wwp1205/test/index_18.html
I don't think it's just my admittedly amature effort either. Dave
Albright's very professional pano next to mine is also not well
represented by the thumb and banner images they've chosen for him.
I learned the hard way that when people ask to use my images on
their site, I insist on seeing the final presentation before
approving. I want my name to be listed, but I want it listed with
MY image, not someone else's distortion of my image.
Unless the FS site is changed to a different choice of thumb and
banner image, or better yet allow me to submit my own thumb and
banner images (I can choose a long thin slice that is much better
than the one they chose) then I will not approve including my
contributions on the site.
Dan