Forum:HTML5 images

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > HTML5 images
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 7 June 2013 by Suppa chuppa.


HTML5 images. What to do with them? Some contributors want to upload them already, but don't feel they can. The only really changes are the vibrancy of the images and the draw distances, but there needs to be consensus on how to handle images taken in HTML5. The proposed solutions are:

For monsters/NPC/equipment images:

  1. Allow HTML5 as well as java starting from now, as long as there is an improvement in the quality of an image - don't replace for the sake of replacing;
  2. Allow HTML5 images as well as java from when the HTML5 version comes out of beta, with the same stipulation as above;
  3. Only allow images taken in java as that is the version everyone will have access to at first;
  4. Only allow images taken in HTML5 as that will give more colour vibrancy.

For scenery/quest images:

  1. Allow HTML5 as well as java starting from now, to take advantage of the greater draw distances in HTML5, especially for large buildings like the Wizards' Tower;
  2. Allow HTML5 images as well as java when it comes out of beta, for the reasons stated above;
  3. Only allow images taken in java as that is the version everyone will have access to at first;
  4. Only allow images taken in HTML5 as that will give more colour vibrancy and better draw distance.

Discussion

Comment - I'd go with #1 for both, myself. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 20:39, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

"don't replace for the sake of replacing" - Well said there. MolMan 21:01, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I'd say number 1 to both options. pjJ4pBM.png Abyssal vine whip.png 21:23, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Number one sounds like the way to go. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 01:25, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

2/2 - Wait for HTML5 to go live; makes it relevant and provides space for any graphic changes. Alchez 09:23, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

3/2 - The beta should go live first, as changes are still being made. For example, water still looks like paint and is being worked on. As for NPCs, monsters, player images and items, we should only use Java since HTML5 has weird-ish AA and odd shadows and LD, so java is better. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 09:34, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

1/1 - But with a healthy dose of brainpower. If the image is worse than what we had before, don't use it. Real Crazy 10:02, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

1/1 - Is anyone allowed to vote or just admins? It makes sense to include the best images for everything which means adding HTML5 images in most cases. Waiting for it to come out of beta doesn't make much sense since it just delays adding the better images. Just to be clear adding images in HTML5 and java doesn't mean we'll have 2 of every image side by side in a comparison does it? Because I'm firmly against that.04ismailjj6 (talk) 10:09, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

Everyone is allowed to comment, and it's not so much of a vote as a discussion from which an administrator to determine consensus. Also we wouldn't have side-by-side comparison of the images on every article, as that would be silly. This is whether or not we should allow for the images to be used in the article space (and be uploaded on top of the current images retrieved from the java client). svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 11:49, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

3/1 - Disallow HTML5 images for NPCs and items entirely for now, as you can't turn bloom and lighting detail off, which means Java is pretty much always the better option. Of course, this may be changed before release. Ditto for chatheads, which lack anti-aliasing entirely. For scenery and stuff, I see no reason why we shouldn't start already, but keep in mind that the water is still in development, and once again, bloom cannot be turned off properly, which means the altered colours remain, which causes flames and stuff to become bright white. Similar to looking through the orb in the live game with bloom turned on. Except with bloom turned off. Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 10:11, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I like Number 1. I think it would be silly to replace images if they weren't better, all depends on the quality. (H) Hair 13:10, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

1/1 - Just use the best images we can make. If HTML5 forces you to have bloom (I'm assuming this is a bad thing) then keep it as Java in accordance with proposal 1. 222 talk 07:57, May 30, 2013 (UTC)

1/1 - It's not like the standards for what images require is being changed. If HTML5 doesn't have AA for chatheads, then use java because it has AA. If HTML5 has LD, then use java because you can turn it off. If HTML5 has bloom, use java. This isn't difficult. cqm 10:52, 30 May 2013 (UTC) (UTC)

1/4 Temujin 13:11, May 31, 2013 (UTC)

1/1 - Seems to be the way to go, best quality above all =D Dragon dagger.png AmoVos 00:00, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

"best quality above all" for what? All of our images? or just the ones we feel like spending time on to look pretty? Don't waste time on an image that is perfectly presentable as is. MolMan 00:56, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

2/2 - As the only browser supporting html5 at the moment is Chrome and there will be no html5 client. Java images don't have to be phased out just yet. 5-x Talk 19:20, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

My own idea - Why not put them side by side, since html5 and java are both going to be out anyway within a few months. Not only would it be more informational, but it would mean no either/or, and no judgementalism as to which client players prefer.Ice Rush12Zaros symbol.pngTalkHiscores 06:45, June 4, 2013 (UTC)

ಠ_ಠ No. That'd be disastrous in infoboxes, to say the least. Blaze_fire.png12.png 07:33, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
That sounds like getting a duplicate image for everything on the wikia... and not like a good idea. The only proper place to have a Java vs HTML5 image comparison would be on the HTML5 page (or similar) to actually show the difference; not everywhere on the wikia. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 07:51, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
Okay, why not have a duplicate set of pages that is identical to the original ones, like the way we did for the combat beta, and have them set up for hotdelete or something?-Ice Rush12Zaros symbol.pngTalkHiscores 16:14, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
Because the graphics are that important! MolMan 16:15, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
We don't need to have side by side comparisons for every image, since that is 1. Unnecessary 2. Useless for the visitors 3. Extra work. Duplicate pages... what. It changes the graphics, not the content. Hair 16:20, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
What the talking quiff said, the Beta space was used because the entire combat system was being reworked. This is purely graphical. Real Crazy 17:04, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
There are 54,680 images on the wiki... sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 18:43, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
If graphics are so unimportant, what the hell is the point of this thread then?Ice Rush12Zaros symbol.pngTalkHiscores 22:13, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
My understanding was that I was going to be granted the Authenticated right by wikia if this proposal passed. Support MolMan 22:15, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
No. Suppa chuppa Talk 05:16, June 7, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - Both Java and HTML5 images will be allowed for all subjects from now on. Suppa chuppa Talk 05:16, June 7, 2013 (UTC)