mic_none

Talk:Parallax scrolling Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Parallax_scrolling

Current example

[edit]

I see only 3 layers. 0_Ô 84.182.83.207 (talk) 23:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to say the same, then I took another look. The dark grass is actually scrolling more slowly than the foreground. I think, however, it is kind of subtle for an example. I think one thing making it confusing is the dark grass has some light grass drawn on it, and the light grass has some dark grass drawn on it. Also, 3 or even 2 layers would be enough to explain the concept OhSqueezy (talk) 09:03, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to make a new one, BTW -- didn't mean to just complain OhSqueezy (talk) 09:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move

[edit]

Shouldnt this be moved to Parallax Scrolling ?

Agree. - furrykef (Talk at me) 05:43, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Tone on last part looks neutral. Suggest removing the note about 'fan's point of view' Slipandslide (talk) 12:04, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too technical?

[edit]

I've moved this from Parallax scroll. However, I'm feeling that this article seems a little too technical, and I'm having some difficulty understanding how this works. Could anybody makes this a little more clear? Oklonia 00:27, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The "layer way" of parallax scrolling is a method of suggesting three dimensions during animation by having objects that are farther away scroll slower than objects in front of them. For a Flash example of this, check out http://joesparks.shockwave.com/production/productionnote_02.htm. Not sure about the "raster way" though. CHz 04:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just finished adding a boatload of background information that should help explain the techniques. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 05:19, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think that while the use of raster techniques, was highly prevalent in the early days of computer animation - it's not really relevant to this article. The right place for raster interrupt techniques is in a specialised area or article directly related to 8-bit computing. They are interesting and important things to be documented, and they could be linked to from here in a 'Implementing Parallax Scrolling in Early Graphical Computer Systems' style link - but the information isn't directly related to the topic at hand. zen_tom 14:47, 18 October 2005
Clarified. Raster effects are still relevant today, as many TV games and handhelds are similar to the 3rd and 4th generation consoles. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 19:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good example, I think I'll make that an external link in the article. WikiSlasher 07:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve added a deconstructed example to demonstrate the concept. I realise it’s fantastically ugly; hopefully someone will find it so embarrasing that they create a better one to replace it. Be bold and all that. -Ahruman 14:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parallax scrolling and Pseudo-3D merging?

[edit]

I just made major edits on Pseudo-3D. Parallax scrolling and Pseudo-3D are not synonymous. Parallax scrolling is "moving the camera vertically or horizontally, with different layers moving at different speed, therefore giving the feeling of depth". Pseudo-3D is any illusion that gives you the depth perception you usually get by the true geometric rules of a threedimensional world has while only making this illusions with concepts and rules of a twodimensional world.

Therefore I would say, Parallax scrolling is a subfield of Pseudo-3D. Yet, parallax scrolling is of such great importance to cartoons, computer games etc. that I would prefer to have a separate article for it. --Abdull 12:51, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I liked the animation and explanation of Parallax scrolling. However, it says "By moving layer 2 twice as fast as layer 1, and layer 3 twice as fast as layer 1, a suggestion of perspective is achieved". Shouldn't it be "By moving layer 2 twice as fast as layer 1, and layer 3 twice as fast as layer 2, a suggestion of perspective is achieved". As a matter of fact, the two middle-layers are moving at the same speed, thus defeating the purpose of having 2 and not 1 layer there.

The layers are all moving at different speeds, although I appreciate that this isn’t very visible. Layer 3 is in fact moving three times as fast as layer 1. I did say it was fantastically ugly. :-) -Ahruman 16:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animated Example

[edit]

Some people have said it's quite ugly and a bit hard to easily read, well, I've been making a game that uses parallax layers, and we have a built in recording function, I've recorded a short example of the layers moving, and I can supply each individual layer if needed, here's the animated example: http://i24.tinypic.com/4pvxih.gif Please reply if you think a change is in order —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.120.37 (talk) 09:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of the current animation, I’d be very happy to see it replaced with something better (such as your example), especially if the separate layers can still be shown. -Ahruman (talk) 10:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, are the separate layers from the example also available? --trevj (talk) 12:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Defender

[edit]

I can't find a reference, but I can see for myself in MAME that Defender (1980) uses parallax scrolling - the stars move much more slowly than the landscape. Claims that Moon Patrol was first appear suspect - although its parallax scrolling was more advanced. 86.158.246.183 (talk) 19:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how Defender (1980) qualifies as parallax scrolling, as it does not have any scenery objects moving over the background. Simply having a background moving at a different rate than another background layer does not qualify. There should be an overlap, like in the classic animation technique. I like Forbidden Forest (1983) for Commodore 64 for an early example of multi-layer software parallax scrolling on a home system. You have multiple layers of graphics moving at different speeds, overlapping in a way that creates an illusion of 3D. 91.156.123.180 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Parallax scrolling is simply multi-planar scrolling where one layer moves at a different rate than the other. There is nothing that defines layers needing elements visually "overlapping", though a layer or plane for technical purposes does overlap as they are virtually stacked on top of another layer. Defender uses 3 layer parallax scrolling, as do a number of early arcade games. One for the star background and one for the mountainscape, and one for the player. Later games such as Moon Patrol or the mentioned Forbidden Forest, add more. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moon Patrol

[edit]

I think the fact that parallax scrolling was popularized in the game Moon Patrol in not important enough to be in the first sentence, so I moved it to the end of the summary paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.76.224.55 (talk) 23:14, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Web design

[edit]

This article is missing parallax scrolling as part of web design[1]. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tone on last part looks neutral. Suggest removing the note about 'fan's point of view' Slipandslide (talk) 12:04, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed ambiguous popularity phrase from web design section. Removed FANPOV and ADVERT tags. -- SEWilco (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As a website designer, I have some questions for adding to this article (and whether the article needs clarification at all). Should the technologies be expanded for the tools required to create parallax websites? While HTML5 is inherently used to create webpages, it isn't the component that implements the parallax scrolling; that is most often javascript or a javascript-based library, examples[1][2][3][4] (I am not sure what a good source to site here would be; should individual tools or overviews be cited here?). Also, "parallax" scrolling has been used to refer to general animations dependent upon a visitor's position on the page. Should this be mentioned, because it can might get confusing for people not familiar with the evolution of parallax website design?

References

  1. ^ "Skrollr - Parallax Scrolling for the Masses".
  2. ^ "Stellar.js".
  3. ^ "Technologies for Parallax Websites".
  4. ^ "Best Tools and Plugins for Creating Parallax Websites".

Conflating game and web design

[edit]

The article currently fails to disambiguate between two (completely valid, but orthogonal/incomparable) kinds of "parallax scrolling".

In essence, what do we mean by "scrolling"?

When we say that the 2.5D background of a NES game is "scrolling", we don't mean that the NES is a web browser, or that the input device of the user is directly capable of "scrolling", including destructively interfering with programmatic scrolling (if any), nor that NES games are typically (or ever) "Documents" in the sense that these can be scrolled, etc.

However, in web design, there *is* such a thing as (e.g) scroll-driven animations (and likely any number of other "related" HTML/JS/CSS features that may well require disambiguation, if not separate treatment). I imagine these are what the study deals with. Nothing to do with NES games in other words (read: nor with any other application of the 2.5D graphical style of "scrolling", including in a browser context!).

Even in the browser context (where we have now disambiguated "2.5D" from "scrolling the Document", remember?), we still have yet more different connotations to scrolling the document (user input, programmatic, sliding window). And we can also talk entirely about scroll events on their own, and the ability to hijack them to do any arbitrary thing on the page (but crucially driven by scroll input, in that case).

And so on.

I don't see that 2.5D "parallax scrolling" has anything reason to even mention web design (indeed, we can employ 2.5D parallax scrolling in our web design, not the other way around).

TL;DR: The entire web development subheading very much belongs somewhere else, e.g. in an article discussing motion sickness, UX, accessibility, or indeed web design.

All the best, 98.128.228.59 (talk) 10:59, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]