What is your algorithm for shading here? It seems like brightness is partially provided by the density of the characters (eg, '8' vs '.', as in normal ascii art), but also partially by the color of the characters.
It could be a little smarter about using the shape of the neighborhood to figure out which character to use, but it seems the lookup table is solely based on brightness, or I'm missing some subtlety in the code. It seems overly complex for what it does, but not for what it could be doing.
All of this is pulled from Sol's TextFX library. The character bitmap actually doesn't line up to Sol's table, so that's why you see weird characters popping up in places. The main goal was just to get image to text working on the GPU. I've typically done it on the CPU. Over time I hope the mess gets cleaned up.
Ah, I see what I was missing: there are four components in the key (r,g,b,a), and each one corresponds to how filled-in each quadrant of the character is. But since each component is 0..16, and the hash table lookup is 256x256, shouldn't packColor be defined as (color.r + 16.0 * color.g + 256.0 * color.b + 4096.0 * color.a)?
If you keep zooming in eventually the perspective flips. As you keep zooming in more the perspective gets warped and it creates a bizarre fish-eye effect.
I had about as much fun playing around with perspective warping as I did the finding things to look at in ASCII.
Pick a location and compare it to the standard street view on google maps, and you'll notice a similar "more 3D" appearance.
The reason is that it's using three.js to map the panorama onto a spherical geometry. This is actually quite an old trick used to give a more immersive feel to panorama viewers dating at least back to the days of QTVR.
How is it that this and GSVPano does not violate Google's term of service, since they pull images from Google's undocumented street view API? I have a related project, but am not sure if I can make it public because of this issue. Does Google simply not care?
I was working on a similar project a while back, to view Street View through various filters (B&W high-contrast, pseudo-cyanotype, etc.), but I did it by pulling a few hundred images and caching them, to avoid hitting it in real-time, which I thought might be a problem. Given that I see several of these not being taken down, though, maybe I was too cautious.
Fwiw, Cyano-View Copenhagen was my project (hit "[reload]" at the top/right for a new random view, or scroll down for concept blurb):
I would guess google doesn't care for five reasons:
1. There's a documented API to fetch these images, but it's less convenient.
2. These demos make Google look good.
3. There's no potential to squeeze money out of the creators of these demos, because they aren't monetized in any way.
4. Shutting down people who are playing (relatively) harmlessly with their technology would hurt Google's community image.
5. The demos are of no practical use, so if Google breaks compatibility, nobody will care.
So if you look at the costs and benefits, it would be unwise for Google to crack down on this sort of thing. But if you started selling an iOS app that used this, I'd be shocked if they didn't smack you down.
h - Toggle visibility of the HUD (minimap and information)
space - Toggle the rotation on/off
- (numpad) - Slow down the rotation (slowing below 0 reverses rotation)
+ (numpad) - Speed up the rotation
- (main keyboard) - Lower the delta by which the rotation speed is increased/decreased (default delta is 0.005, lowers by 0.0001)
= (main keyboard) - Raise the delta by which the rotation speed is increased/decreased (default delta is 0.005, raises by 0.0001)
These MacBooks have dual graphics chipsets don't they? So does the HP Envy I'm using now. Chrome has a built-in list of chipsets on which it disables WebGL. It detects the onboard Intel chipset as on that list and disables WebGL even though the ATI Radeon chipset I'm actually using at the moment would handle the site easily. I'm guessing it's the same situation on your MacBook.
You can probably manually flip a setting in about:flags to turn WebGL back on. I just switch to Firefox to check out the demos.
I'm not sure why I'm being down-voted, is it frowned upon to complain about that? I'm simply stating that the site is unusable from a popular mobile device. Sometimes the site maintainer reads the thread and he might not be aware.