Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: linked time-series of panoramas
- It is impossible to draw any conclusion from download times of one or the
other being better or worse, when the examples are placed on completely
different servers, different images, different layouts, different
continents, different... the whole thing. That is why
http://www.panoramaphotographer.com/comparisons/ is such a darn good
initiative. Putting all the eggs in one basket... so to speak. It is the
only fair model of comparing the different players there is. Everything
else is just "noise" and "opinions".
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:37 PM, krpanocoder <mail@...> wrote:
> for me here in austria (with an 8mbit dsl connection) the situation is as
> in this pano:
> the first sharp tiles are there within the first seconds (1-3),
> and the full view is ready within more 1-2 seconds, and while panning
> around the loading of the new tiles is also fast and they are there after
> 0-1 seconds,
> > http://www.panoramas.dk/2009/Ngau-Tau-Kok-hongkong.html
> it takes also 1-3 seconds for the first visible parts, but then it takes
> longer to load for the rest (up to more than 10 seconds),
> and the panning while loading is much slower and it will slow down the
> download even more...
> beside of this - the examples are not very good comparable, the 360cities
> example load a lot of thumbs and a google map (the google map itself will
> also load a lot of small files) at the beginning and the other example load
> the thumbs and the other elements when the loading of the pano was done...
> best regards,
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Keith Martin <keith@...> wrote:
>All flash players does. At least the 4 main ones.
> Sometime around 1/10/09 (at 16:26 +0200) Jeffrey Martin | 360Cities.net said:
> >even though I requested it be included there. :(
> Aww, turn that frown upside down Jeffrey. ;-)
> Seriously though, it was and is a good point. The reason it isn't
> included in what's there now is because that is supposed to be an 'as
> it comes'-style set of comparisons. For the sake of the sanity of the
> group helping to get this done, if nothing else!
> But yes, now that that's done there are further things that would be
> good to show as well.
> Tiled content. Which players support this?
Pano2VR has it as standard option
FPP has it by using tiled QTVR
and KRpano can also do it with QTVR or with tiled cubefaces.
Tiled multiresolutionn is a completelly different case.
I get back to why that is not always working as it should.