I remember sending the ST an email about decompressing images in a scratch file. John Maloney responded with this:
John Maloney wrote:
Hi, MathWizz.
That's definitely an ambitious project, but it sounds as though you are making good progress. You may have trouble implementing all of the features of Scratch in HTML5. The note/drum blocks seem especially difficult, and the image effects could be too slow to be useable. Still, even without some features it would be great to have an HTML5 Scratch viewer that can run Scratch projects on a wide variety of devices...
Anyway... I think this proves him wrong: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6274273/webgl/filters.htm
Scratch chokes on the same image.
Last edited by MathWizz (2012-07-20 10:31:17)
Offline
Nice effect. May want to read over your post though.
Offline
I could give advice if you're having problems reading the images in the .sb format. (: It took ages making Kurt read them properly...
Offline
MathWizz wrote:
blob8108 wrote:
I could give advice if you're having problems reading the images in the .sb format. (: It took ages making Kurt read them properly...
No no, they're fine now. This was ~2 years ago.
![]()
Oh, good
the run-length encoding was the hardest part... I still haven't written the encoder for it, so images saved with Kurt are much larger than with Scratch...
Offline
It appears black on Safari, but works fine on chrome.
Offline
Nice. Glad to see progress on something like this. JsScratch, right?
Offline
Offline
Nothing happens. Seems familiar. I'm feeling left out.
Offline
MathWizz wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
Nothing happens. Seems familiar. I'm feeling left out.
![]()
Get chrome.
![]()
I thought Chrome and Safari both use the WebKit layout engine; what works on one should work on the other.
Gecko is still best though. :3
Offline
MathWizz wrote:
Whirl anyone? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6274273/awesome.htm
Now you overwrote the fisheye
Awesome anyway! How's JSScratch coming along? Reading its thread, I see you made a userscript, but where's the actual player now?
Offline
LS97 wrote:
MathWizz wrote:
Whirl anyone? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6274273/awesome.htm
Now you overwrote the fisheye
![]()
Awesome anyway! How's JSScratch coming along? Reading its thread, I see you made a userscript, but where's the actual player now?
It's still where is was before... Just a little out of date.
Offline
Looking good. Nice to see some HTML5 and Javascript. Its a powerful combination and *can* be better than more commonly used ones (E.G Java, C++, etc.)
Offline
Muhahahahaha.
Note the sliders at the top of the canvas.
Last edited by MathWizz (2012-07-20 10:18:10)
Offline
Whatever you just did, it was the right thing.
IT WORKS, and it's TOTALLY AWESOME (even by my standards, which is really saying something)
Offline
MathWizz wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
Whatever you just did, it was the right thing.
0.o Odd.
Hardmath123 wrote:
IT WORKS, and it's TOTALLY AWESOME (even by my standards, which is really saying something)
![]()
Thanks! :DDD
Why do you need WebGL for this though? You can probably make it with standard 2d canvas with a little hacking, right?
grrrrrrrrrrr wrote:
The following errors need to be corrected before the message can be posted:
* At least 60 seconds have to pass between posts. Please wait a little while and try posting again.
Offline
Hardmath123 wrote:
MathWizz wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
Whatever you just did, it was the right thing.
0.o Odd.
Hardmath123 wrote:
IT WORKS, and it's TOTALLY AWESOME (even by my standards, which is really saying something)
![]()
Thanks! :DDD
Why do you need WebGL for this though? You can probably make it with standard 2d canvas with a little hacking, right?
Looping through all of the pixels WITHOUT changing pixels values is laggy. With an image this size, days would pass before finishing (jk
). Just looping through a 32x32 pixel image for color detection is slow.
Last edited by MathWizz (2012-07-20 10:27:56)
Offline
MathWizz wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
MathWizz wrote:
Hardmath123 wrote:
Whatever you just did, it was the right thing.
0.o Odd.
Thanks! :DDDWhy do you need WebGL for this though? You can probably make it with standard 2d canvas with a little hacking, right?
Looping through all of the pixels WITHOUT changing pixels values is laggy. With an image this size, days would pass before finishing (jk
). Just looping through a 32x32 pixel image for color detection is slow.
![]()
Ah yes, webgl is linked almost directly to the graphics card, right? Speed is a problem with JS.
Offline