News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor by alkonaut on Monday October 27, 2014 @05:00PM (#8518150)
What is supposed to be faster? If there is downsampling to 8bit then of course it is easier. If you can't load the full res image then it's easier (and so on and so forth).

Impressive, sure. But faster? Lightroom?

Re:Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor by bwang29 on Monday October 27, 2014 @05:07PM (#8518194)
Try loading two 24mb 8 bit JPEG files into Polarr and Lightroom. Then try adjust knobs such as exposure and temperature. The rendition in Polarr is apparently faster due to its use of downsampling on the fly but still it uses fully sampled images after the user stops the interaction. I believe Lightroom is doing downsampling in one way or the other.
Re:Show HN: Polarr.co, a WebGL photo editor by alkonaut on Monday October 27, 2014 @05:21PM (#8518253)
Awesome.

Like I said, impressive, but you'll catch a lot of flak for an otherwise impressive application by using the lightroom hyperbole. I don't think many people use lightroom to edit 8bit jpgs (changing exposure on a jpg is a bit disappointing!)