I have icons built as svg or png just as easily.
Also for those people that are using svg, what's the method you are using to display these?
Official iOS Dev documentation says "the PNG format is the one most recommended for use in your apps". You can read it for a lot more information here.
although the supported file types table doesn't list .SVG. Apple values user experience. SVG scaling consumes a few more CPU cycles which they don't like. PNG rendering is more efficient than SVG,and there are cases like zoom-in / out scenarios where SVGs would be better though.
if you want to use SVG icons across platforms in Xamarin Forms,you could use the Xamarin.FFImageLoading.Svg.Forms library which allow us to achieve this easily.
the more you could refer to SVG icons with FFImageLoading
I've got a project where I need to be able to display video on all six sides side of a cube that moves and rotates in three dimensions, using Qt. I know the question is vague, but I'm completely new to graphics, so a high-level description of which classes I should look and how they should link together would be a lot of help. Should I use GLRenderer or the ordinary one? Is Qt even the right tool for the job?
What you could do, is use QtOpenGL to render the cube. Then you use video texturing.
I'm writing a game engine and using opengl/qt. I'm trying to use webkit as a 2D UI overlay for menus etc. I found some examples but none of them work for some reason. For example adding two widgets QGLWidget and a QWebView doesn't seem to work.
How should I do this without losing much performance?
Trying to achieve something like this
http://attasi.com/labs/ipad/ which uses CSS transforms.
but using the Canvas object for greater compatibility.
Does anyone know if this is possible?
Take a look at three.js, it can render 3D using mainly WebGL, but it supports a subset of stuff with <canvas>, SVG and even the plain DOM - check this demo that uses the DOM renderer.
Here are demos using canvas. Some guy made this which shows it can do textured, animated game-like 3D with canvas.
Also, you may want to check out a particle engine and a tweening engine to go with that, plus stats like FPS.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
For basic 3d web application i.e. a few cubes, rotation and translation in 3d space - which is better to choose?
CSS 3d seems the easiest, but is not supported on IE9 or on the roadmap for IE10, and offers less control than the other options.
Canvas & WebGL seems way more complicated, but I don't know if they are future proof.
Why are there so many different techniques for 3D? which is better? which is future proof?
The reason there are so many different options for 3D is because the whole thing is still in a state of flux -- 3D in the browser isn't a finished standard, and of the options you listed, the only one that works in all currently available browsers is Canvas.
IE in particular is unlikely to give you much joy -- as you say, 3D isn't even slated for IE10 at this point. Having said that, SVG was added to IE9 quite late in the day, so there's always hope. But the reason it's unlikely is that Microsoft have made a point of only supporting features which have been formally ratified as standards.
Of the technologies you listed, Canvas is by far the best supported, but Canvas isn't a 3D technology; it's a 2D canvas, and if you want to have 3D effects in it, you need to write them yourself, and they won't be hardware accelerated.
I guess the real answer to your question depends on how important the feature is for your site. If it's just eye candy, which users of unsupported browsers could live without, then by all means do it with some 3D CSS. But if you need to make it consistent in all current browsers, then do it with Canvas.
I'd tend to recommend not using WebGL for your case, because it sounds like it would be overkill for what you're doing.
3D CSS is probably the right answer, but use Canvas for now, until the rest of the browsers add support for 3D CSS.
I know this is 2 years old but I figure I'd post this here for future readers.
What to choose depends on what you need.
Do you need a simple 3d shape with no or little animations? Try if you can do it with CSS3, that's the easiest by far. For IE you can probably get a library that offers support.
Do you need some sweet 3d models with nice graphics and that can do all kinds of stuff? Go WebGL, you can't ask for more control AND performance for 3d in browsers.
Do you need 3d shapes that can do all kinds of stuff, but don't need textures and will work everywhere and won't require much performance? Go Canvas.
CSS3 is just for the eye-candy. You can make it rather easily, style it any way you want and is very easily maintainable. Once you want to do more than just eye-candy, put on your gloves because that is gonna reuire some work.
With 2d Canvas you can make 3d stuff. If you're new to it, it will be very annoying and complicated (to name one example; you need to know of matrices), You can pretty much do anything with 2d canvas that you can do with WebGL but some thing will be easier in WebGL (seriously, if going 2d Canvas, don't try to use textures, it's a nightmare). WebGL uses OpenGL which, in a nutshell, means it will always outperform 2d Canvas.
However, WebGL requires the user to have a compatible video card.
I really depends on what you are trying to do. How simple is simple?
3D CSS is far from usable. It's only just made it into firefox. It's buggy in both firefox and chrome. It's not working in FF9 beta on OSX. It's also got issues in Chrome up through at least 16. See http://greggman.com/downloads/examples/intersecting-elements-3d-css.html and compare Safari on OSX to pretty much any other browser.
three.js (https://github.com/mrdoob/three.js/) used to (and maybe still does) provide some simple 3d using canvas.
Otherwise if you want anything interesting go WebGL and pick a library (three.js, SceneJS, etc..)
You've got to make a choice. Use WebGL and give up IE, Use Flash 11, Use Unity3D, use Canvas and get very limited 3d, or don't do 3d.
WebGL is already being used by major sites. CNN is now using WebGL http://www.stinkdigital.com/en/work/ecosphere
Everyone is probably tired of hearing 'it depends', but...it depends!
There's a little "war" going on as to whether it's better to use Canvas or HTML/CSS3, and namely because Canvas is slower than DOM on older machines/devices. Yeap, DOM is way faster in some cases, while canvas is faster on most modern browsers/devices.
WebGL - Best option for both 2D and 3D, but since it is not well enough supported across browsers and devices, you'll have to offer fallback to canvas or DOM whenever necessary.
Canvas - Less suitable for 3D comparing to WebGL, but more suitable for compatibility, community, tools etc
DOM - Faster than most think, if used right, highest support around, but you cannot go too fancy animation/gaming-wise.
Hope this helps