https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69609
Bug ID: 69609
Summary: Test if replacing the blur effect with pixelation
makes loading feel faster
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Version: master
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: Unprioritized
Component: MultimediaViewer
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
This should be perfect for an A/B test with random users. Goal: Find out which
method feels fastest.
A: Show them the loading animation with the current blur effect.
B: Just remove the blur effect and let the browser decide how to scale the
thumbnail (usually bicubic). That's what Google Maps does, by the way.
C: Use nearest-neighbor image rendering[1]. Yes, I really mean that. That's a
very common trick in game development, made popular (but not invented) by
Minecraft. There is a chance that big, square pixels make a better, less
distracting user experience than any type of interpolation.
D: Remove the thumbnail and just show the empty, dark background till the image
is loaded. Maybe add a progress spinner like Lightbox does.
Personally I think C would feel faster and less distracting. The current blur
effect does have strange effects to my brain (and I have read and heard similar
stories from other users): My eyes immediately start refocusing the obviously
out-of-focus image but can't work it out. This is really distracting and makes
the loading time feel longer than it is because I'm so focused on something
that I should not care about.
[1]https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/CSS/image-rendering
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
