Hi gang:
I found something that really impressed me -- please review this:
http://palomarjewelry.com/product/id/19/collectionId/1/typeId/3
Try changing the number and type of stones and watch the main image
change (i.e., the basket).
If one calculates the number of permutations required to show this
single piece of jewelry with 12 different stone types located in 15
different stone positions, you will arrive at a very large number.
The specific math escapes me at the moment but something in the order
of 15 factorial -- a very large number.
Now, I realize that this company did not take 15 factorial pictures
of this single piece of jewelry to present all these different
combinations but instead placed smaller images of each of the stones
at specific coordinates on the larger image of the jewelry.
I imagine that each piece of jewelry must have the coordinates of
each setting in a database so that they can "on-the-fly" assemble the
finished product as per user's direction.
For example, let's take the image of the basket pendant showing three
stones. Each of the stone locations would have a specific pixel
placement (i.e., x,y). As such, the database would have a field for
the image and three location fields for stones 1, 2, and 3.
Now, we also have smaller images of 12 different stones (in heads)
that are all the same size. Thus, as the user picks the stones and
positions they want and the image is assembled "on the fly".
Is that the way you see this? Or is there a better way?
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
