Is there a good reason not to use WebGL to render the scene and compute the character mapping? Even if you're dead set on outputting text to a `<pre>` you could write the ascii values out to a framebuffer and copy from that for a pretty significant speedup.
When the topic is rendering 3d models using ASCII glyphs, we've already exited the realm of advantages and disadvantages. This is just supposed to be cool.
This is actually pretty awesome. I enjoyed going through all the models.
I'm also not sure why I love ASCII art so much. Maybe it's because it's such an abstract way to represent something, yet our brains make perfect sense of everything.
The shading is where it all comes to life.
What is the file size of one single model on average?
Thanks! The gallery holds real 3D files (.glb/.obj/.vox), ~300 KB each. The ASCII isn't stored, it's rendered live from the mesh. Its size only depends on the grid resolution, not the model: a full-screen view is ~150×50 characters, so around ~10 KB of text (a cube and a detailed mesh would produce the same byte count)
Every now and then I see this crap here. And people even engage into discussion. This is ridiculous.
I wouldn't call it low effort ... seems to be done over the course of months.
I agree with those 4 commits started this morning projects that get huge hype and screaming fanboys, that's absurd. But I don't think this is that.
Why is this an advantage? I have a GPU and I'd rather it was used. As-is, one of my CPU cores is pegged at 100% just rendering the landing page.
I get your point though, that the same ASCII rendering effect might be doable at much higher scale without pegging the CPU.
I'm also not sure why I love ASCII art so much. Maybe it's because it's such an abstract way to represent something, yet our brains make perfect sense of everything.
The shading is where it all comes to life.
What is the file size of one single model on average?
Is there a console version?