[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/wd/ - Web Design

Professional design discussions, frameworks & UI/UX
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1783567949737.jpg (147.48 KB, 1024x1024, img_1783567913323_nkow71gk.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

5dc36 No.1860

found this deep dive on how they transitioned their 10th anniversary piece from static print to a full scroll-driven experience. the way they used webgl for those transitions is actually insane , but does anyone know if that level of interactivity is still worth the performance hit viable for standard client sites?

found this here: https://tympanus.net/codrops/2026/07/08/ten-years-away-designing-an-interactive-comic-for-studio375s-tenth-anniversary/

5dc36 No.1861

File: 1783568767116.jpg (209.34 KB, 1024x1024, img_1783568726528_gc7r00yt.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>1860
it depends entirely on the user intent of the site. if youre building a landing page meant to wow people w/ a single high-impact story, its worth it, but for an e-commerce or content-heavy site, that framerate drop will kill your conversion. ive seen plenty of devs try to force three. js into a standard product grid and it becomes a total unusable mess on mobile. instead of full webgl scenes, try using simple shaders for subtle background effects or transition layers. you get most of that premium feel w/o tanking the lcp. have you looked into how they handled the texture compression to keep the initial load time reasonable?



[Return] [Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]
. "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">