Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: PTViewerNG - High resolution example

Expand Messages
  • Michel THOBY
    Hi Helmut, Strange: One may see a faint white dotted line in the canal of the higher resolution panorama: http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Dotted.jpg Regards,
    Message 1 of 32 , Feb 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Helmut,

      Strange: One may see a faint white dotted line in the canal of the higher resolution panorama:
      http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Dotted.jpg

      Regards,

      Michel
      > Message du 01/02/10 12:10
      > De : "hd_de_2000"
      > A : PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
      > Copie à :
      > Objet : [PanoToolsNG] Re: PTViewerNG - High resolution example
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, A Kielcz wrote:
      > >
      > > looks like flash beats them all
      > >
      >
      > So you like this
      >
      > better than this
      >
      > No more questions.
      >
      > PTViewerNG employs true downsampling for image areas which are smaller
      > than the original size. This avoids all sorts of moire patterns
      > and other artefacts which are present in the flash version. I am surprised that these are tolerated and actually preferred.
      >
      > The downside is that PTViewerNG appears softer although it really shows all the details which are in the original image. If you really like the ugliness of an artificially sharpened image you can easily switch off mipmap downsampling in the viewer script, and you will get the same output as the flash player.
      > But don't ask me to do that.
      >
      > Regards
      >
      > Helmut Dersch
      >
      >
      >
    • hd_de_2000
      ... Just a leftover of my debugging session until I found out that it didn t work because of the offsetX-thing. I guess I will reinsert the return false
      Message 32 of 32 , Feb 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "ahoeben41" <aldo@...> wrote:
        >
        > I see you removed the "return false" statements from the handleMouse[Down|Up|Move] handlers. I put those there to prevent accidental selections of html elements outside the canvas element. Come to think of it, you only need it for the handleMouseMove handler, and only if currentlyDragging is set.
        >
        > Or does that break things in Firefox? (Ah, brings back memories of the "good old days" of cross-browser testing...)
        >

        Just a leftover of my debugging session until I found out that it didn't work because of the offsetX-thing. I guess I will reinsert the "return false" statements.

        Regards

        Helmut Dersch
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.