On 16.07.23 04:19, David W. Jones wrote:
Regarding lux. The non-appimage version runs here, with its
non-intuitive way of handling mouse movements and image banding that
bugs the heck out of me.
Maybe your user experience can be improved? I feel that a UI close to
360cities' QTVR mode is the best way to interact with, especially, full
sphericals. Admittedly, this may take some time to learn if one isn't
already familiar with it. What you mean with image banding I have no idea.
There once was a time when users felt they were part of a community.
They would work with a program, and if something irked them or they had
ideas what could be made better they would contact the developers and
tell them. For developers, this feedback was valuable, because they
often don't interact with the software from a user's point of view,
because they are 'too much inside' the program and it's inner workings.
And there were others in the community who'd help with technicalities
like packaging, to keep such administrative tasks off the back of the
developers, so that they could concentrate on the software's functionality.
So why am I using past tense? Because I feel these times have passed.
I've been developing lux for several years now, and I feel there is no
community feedback - apart from a few posts full of harsh critcism
giving my program a bad name. I've seldom heard from anyone who actually
said they liked something I made - they all just download it and I have
no idea what happens then. Do they try it once then throw it away
because they don't get it? Keep using it all the time so happily they
never even think about it? They sure seem to take it for granted that
someone would sit down and off-handedly re-implement the Burt&Adelson
image splining algorithm in their spare time and have no problem with
ignoring the fact because, hey, it's been implemented before and we have
used that for years why would we change...
And everyone takes for granted that, on top of developing the software,
I do all the documentation, packaging, distribution and maintenance as
well. Only if something is amiss, there may be a faint echo along the
lines of 'your program is crap, xy does this much better' if their
attention span isn't so short that they immediately proceed to the next
promising stimulus.
If you have specific points in the user interface you'd like to discuss,
why don't you just ask? It's quite possible that some things you'd like
to have are already there and can be had by changing a few parameters.
And, if not, how about asking for a feature? Rather than just
complaining in a thread about a different issue (AppImages) that the UI
bothers you. I feel you tend to give negative criticism. Can you
recommend a good multi-platform panorama viewer which does everything to
your liking?
I think lux would be more useful as a library usable by other programs
(like Hugin, Krita, GIMP, Blender, Inkscape) to tap GPU power for
remapping and rendering.
This is actually a good point. I don't agree lux would be more useful
that way, but I think that some of my back-end code would come in handy
in some of the programs you mention. But the core feature of lux is that
it's rendering on the CPU, not the GPU.
There are always two aspects to using a library: the library provides
features, a program uses them. I can make a beautiful library to no
effect if noone uses it. Since you mention hugin, I proposed to make lux
part of the hugin bundle. No interest. The proposal was shot down. So
how do you think the hugin crew would react if I proposed to them to use
functionality of a hypothetical lux library? I can't see that happening.
Kay
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/0911d333-f62e-1745-a028-a65fcf113b38%40yahoo.com.
