Open bikubi opened 8 years ago
Does the WebGL test page work? As this rendering artifact only happens with the CSS 3D transform-based fallback renderer, it is clearly being used.
Thank you for your reply! Yeah, the test page does work. I'm not sure if it's relevant - I can see it loading/using multiple resolutions, and the level tiles pop up in the Network Panel as i zoom around...
This is really odd then; I've never seen this happen with WebGL before. If you open chrome://gpu/
, what does it say under Graphics Feature Status
for WebGL? I'm wondering whether it's using software rendering.
On both machines (broken & working) it says "WebGL: Hardware accelerated". I've put both complete outputs in a gist, here's a htmlpreview...
What I've naively noticed is thousands of Log Messages on the broken system:
YUV_420_BIPLANAR requires GL_TEXTURE_RECTANGLE_ARB target
The best I can tell, it's a bug in the WebGL implementation. I'm not sure what I can do about it. Without direct access to a machine that displays this issue, it will be next to impossible for me to debug the problem.
Yeah, I had a feeling it was something like that :)
For the record and for whomever might need to work around this, here's the gist of my setup. Chromes on OSX get a multires
config - that's too greedy, but I have no idea how to detect a broken WebGL / specific type of Mac.
var pannellum_cfg = {
multiRes: {
//...
},
//...
cubeMap: ['fallback/f.jpg', 'fallback/r.jpg', '...'],
basePath: '...',
type: ((navigator.platform.indexOf('Mac') > -1) && !!window.chrome && !!window.chrome.webstore)
? 'cubemap'
: 'multires'
};
It's basically the multires
and cubemap
configs merged into one object, with a browser-and-OS-sniffing type
property.
Or make the container's width
absolute ;)
Looks like this:
Affects, as far as I can tell
multires
panoramasI know this is pretty narrow/specific, but to me important. I'm thinking of targeting/sniffing Chrome on OSX and somehow forcing the
fallback
version, ascubemap
andequirectangular
are fine...Very likely related to #266 and #248. I've come across the artifacts shown in the latter issue, but haven't reproduced them since.
And yet another update, sorry: as in #266, I just tried an old Chromium (37.0.2033.0), which works just fine.