3 ms·
Google have already provided this themselves, plus hooked it up to a 3D rendering engine: https://github.com/google-ar/three.ar.js https://github.com/google-ar
by Benjamin_Dobell 9y ago
Google have already provided this themselves, plus hooked it up to a 3D rendering engine:
https://github.com/google-ar/three.ar.js https://github.com/google-ar/three.ar.js
That's assuming you're okay with JS, but if you're going cross-platform then it makes sense if you need to have interactive scenes.
- pjmlp 9y agoThe problem with WebVR, is that just like WebGL, it is capped, versus what is possible in actual OpenGL ES.
- Benjamin_Dobell 9y agoI've been developing WebGL software for a client for the last few years and my client has had quite good success selling content based on the software and consumers are using the content. The vast majority of browsers fully support WebGL (1). The biggest performance bottle-neck is the JS itself, specifically stock three.js is quite inefficient. However, that's just a matter of optimising three.js, or using WebGL directly if you need more fine-grained control. You can get a lot done in a browser these days.
- pjmlp 9y agoI have seen impressive WebGL demos, but for some reason WebGL always makes the GPU sweat more than plain native code driving my fan at full speed, even though it offers less. Maybe it is a consequence of using JS, I have never researched it.