20 comments

[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 71.5 ms ] thread
Why exclude mobile browsers? Both Chrome and Firefox on Android support webGL.
And it'll use a lot more power. I wouldn't want a simple logo to keep my GPU busy for no reason when surfing on my phone.
While the technique is interesting, that's just about the ugliest logo I've ever seen.
I thought it was cool. Similar aesthetic to the effect in Teleglitch.
So much work for such a crappy effect? Am I missing something here? Is this art?
Perhaps the secret agenda is to discourage web designers from abusing this tech and making the web heavier & more complicated than it already is. :-)
Thank you for teaching how to use WebGL. The internet could use more tutorials like these.

I think people are missing the point: it's not meant to look good, it's meant to teach people. So let's stop discouraging.

(comment deleted)
A lot of discouragement in this thread. Nice one HN!

Thanks for this post, interesting read!

what's the advantage of doing client side rendering in webgl vs a video logo or a JS sprite animation of some sort even.
Scalability and interactivity, which is both not used here.
have you heard about PathGL?
I know its not the point of the post but there is a small error: Neither of Blender's render engines is physically-accurate. (And only 1 is physically based.) You need to use something like Luxrender (it can be used with Blender) if you want a physically unbiased render.
(comment deleted)
This was a much deeper look than the simple tutorial I was expecting. Very nice!
Please don't let webgl become the next animated gif