wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: jpeg upload problems
Yahoo Account 2009-Jun-25 17:38:00
>From: "#removed#" <#removed#>
>>Comment:
>>If the equirect is optional, and an entry might not have a Flash version, then the experience for those who "Prefer Flash", will be incomplete. How will it work when the Flash preference is set but there's no Flash version. A message like "No Flash version"? Then I have to click "Back" to make another try? Maybe if you say "Prefer Flash (Beta)" it will help. Or are you converting all QTs to Flash?
>
I tried - the vast majority would work in Flash, a few are simply inconvertible (e.g. objects), some crash the converter, or have features that cannot easily be replicated in Flash. On top of that, I'm not sure about adapting someone else's photographic concept.
>>Re: the "set top/bottom limit" - it's only helpful for partial spheres ,,,
>>For cylinders, ...
>>However, for cylindrical panoramas with large vertical field of view,
>
>>Comment:
>>If all of them are equirectangles, I do not see the difference between these. Isn't a cylinder a partial sphere? And the set limits are there for what I call a cylinder, so how do I know that it isn't important?
Well, for once I though I might get away with leaving an input field visible when it's not necessary :) I'll see if I can make it disappear once a panorama is declared "Spherical".
Re: the difference - The "classic" cylinders would need infinite height to approach full immersion, so they're not really equirectangular. The y axis is more of a tan(y) scale, if I recall. Of course, there are "cropped spheres", too, which LOOK like cylinders, but are parts of spheres, and the difference matters the more the vertical angles approach 90 degrees.
>>> Once this works, I can turn the "Prefer Flash/Prefer Quicktime" link ...have the browser decide
>
>>Comment:
>>Not sure about this. Personally, I like the firm view of my preference. It might be my imagination, but it seems to me that QT panos usually flow more smoothly. When I come to one that I like to spin in, I might switch back and forth between QT and Flash.
Yes, that's a very good point. What I meant, is that the browser will automatically choose the appropriate plugin in case there's only one of them installed. As soon as both are available, you can switch back/forth manually.
Flash and QTVR will both be available for the JPEG uploads. I've just been behind on the semi-automatic conversion - JPEG-to-Flash is fully automated by now (still with a significant delay, mind you), but JPEG-to-QTVR still needs "a prod" to run.
As of yesterday evening, what data I had so far is available in both QTVR and Flash.
You're right, QT flows much better - at least on my machines (i.e. Intel Macs with less-than-stellar Flash support). I can view a 1920x1080 fullscreen on my mac Mini in Quicktime, but it's more of a slide show experience when I try the same in Flash. Of course, as Flash technology moves forward with 3D hardware acceleration, it'll eventually surpass Quicktime if QTVR remains as stagnant as it currently is.
So far, we haven't reached the smoothness of OpenGL-based players like PangeaVR/Mac or OpenGLPanoView/PC with neither Flash nor QTVR.
-Markus
Okay, I shouldn't even start thinking this, but ...
weeeellll... with JPEG sources, and with the plugin code being dynamically created via Javascript, and all the parameters now in the database ... PangeaVR support may be an extra treat for the folks crazy enough to install an extra plugin just to view panoramas... once I get the rest to run smoothly!
From (no email address) Thu Jun 25 13:10:17 2009
Return-Path: <#removed#>
X-Sender: #removed#
X-Apparently-To: #removed#
X-Received: (qmail 79212 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2009 20:10:17 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (69.147.108.202)
by m2.grp.sp2.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Jun 2009 20:10:17 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO sinanju.com) (74.94.122.1)
by mta3.grp.re1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 2009 20:10:17 -0000
X-Received: from ricksdesktop [10.1.10.133] by sinanju.com with ESMTP
(SMTPD32-7.00) id A99812C701F8; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:10:00 -0500
To: <#removed#>
References: <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#
re1.yahoo.com> <#removed#> <#removed#> <#removed#>
In-Reply-To: <#removed#>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:09:58 -0500
Message-ID: <#removed#>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Expiry-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0500
Thread-Index: Acn1ei7+NkI7xfbuQzWIp/0TJZvvXAAVm/jQ
Content-Language: en-us
X-Originating-IP: 74.94.122.1
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0
From: "Rick Drew" <#removed#>
Subject: RE: jpeg upload problems
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=25071251; y=7hcbY6TuA17dn3B03wAuEMOIgMV_T92lQjnx6ZEk2XPA8Qu6l8U
X-Yahoo-Profile: ricksinanju
JPG uploading:
Works fine in Firefox - but not in IE. IE throws a javascript error,
Firefox uploads with no problem. So if you are experiencing a problem,
trying a different browser may solve the problem - it did for me.
Rick Drew