Re: FLASH: Great tricks... how'd he do that??

[Jason Schubring]

Agreed!


I don't see any reason to go with IPIX over QT.. like you said, the QT

plugin is much more common, and the most popular.  The main advantage is the

single seam.  I don't work with IPIX, I was just trying to point out the

differences between the two.


As far as I am concerned, I would recommend sticking with QT!!


J

 ----------

>

From: David Gary <dgarystudiosmpinet [dot] net>

>

To: flashershocker [dot] com

>Subject: Re: FLASH: Great tricks... how'd he do that??

>Date: Fri, Jan 22, 1999, 9:05 PM

>


>

>

>Jason wrote:

>

>> IPIX is almost exactly the same as a QTVR, except that it requires a

>> differrent plug-in and there is only 1 "seam" to "stitch" together.  Does

>> this help?

>>

>> They look the same, but are different in production.  (IPIX also offers

>> FULL 360 degree views)

>

>When you say FULL 360 do you mean like in "spherical" mapping? QT gives you 360.

>

>Also who would pay for a "key" for each image used because of a "stich" fee? You

>buy QT you create

>as many images as your camera will allow and QT is by far the most popular

>plug-in.

>

>Is there an advantage with IPIX besides paying each time you want to create?

>

>-DG-

>

>

>------------------------------------------------------------------------

>To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

>

email to list-managershocker [dot] com. Problems to: ownershocker [dot] com

>N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

>

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to list-managershocker [dot] com

>

>


------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com