«

Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two) eight-megapixel
images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original

Of course, this is a greatly downsized version. The original
pano is over 10x as large, measuring 21,600 x 5,400 pixels.
This yields a 72" x 18" print @ 300 dpi.
Anybody know about any good deals on 6-foot frames?

The next pic is an actual-size crop from one of the original images.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36406264/original

That's remarkable.

Pano looks addictive.


>
>
>

"Annika1980" <> wrote in message

[snip snip snip]

This obsession with the 20D - it's not, er, related to penis size, by any
chance?...

"Annika1980" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
> This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two)
> eight-megapixel
> images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original
>
> Of course, this is a greatly downsized version. The original
> pano is over 10x as large, measuring 21,600 x 5,400 pixels.
> This yields a 72" x 18" print @ 300 dpi.
> Anybody know about any good deals on 6-foot frames?
>
> The next pic is an actual-size crop from one of the original images.
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36406264/original
>

That is a fantastic shot. The clarity is amazing. What program did you use
to stitch it with? How big was the output file - 1 gb?
Don Dunlap

"Annika1980" <> wrote:

> Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
> This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two)
eight-megapixel
> images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original

That's absolutely gorgeous.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

(Annika1980) wrote:

> Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
> This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two)
> eight-megapixel images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original


Now that we're talking panos anyway, here's one from my trip to
Guatemala in september:

http://perswww.kuleuven.ac.be/~u0039...pano_small.jpg

It's the view from the Tajamulco volcano, the highest peak in
Central America, done with a simple Canon Powershot A80 and Panorama
Factory. It's a bit small, but I'm currently too lazy to post a
bigger version...

Enjoy,
Wald

On 16 Nov 2004 05:24:41 GMT, (Annika1980) wrote:

>Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
>This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two) eight-megapixel
>images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.
>
>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original
>
>Of course, this is a greatly downsized version. The original
>pano is over 10x as large, measuring 21,600 x 5,400 pixels.
>This yields a 72" x 18" print @ 300 dpi.
>Anybody know about any good deals on 6-foot frames?
>
>The next pic is an actual-size crop from one of the original images.
>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36406264/original
>

Nice - again - you seem to suit panoramas. But for a 2000x500 pixel
image with such a wide AOV, detail is *critical* and at 770Kb, you
compressed it too much. An image that took so long to make, surely is
worth a 1.5Mb download?

I guess you avoided using a polarizer for this...

Now it's time for you to take a visit to the Swiss Alps.

--
Owamanga!

>From: "Don dunlap"

>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36406264/original
>>
>
>That is a fantastic shot. The clarity is amazing. What program did you use
>to stitch it with? How big was the output file - 1 gb?
>Don Dunlap

Well that was a tough one. I used Panorama Tools with PT Assembler to do the
stitching. I also used both the Auto-Pano and Enblend plugins. The first run
with PanoTools took about 10 hours to process, and that's on my speedy new P4
with 2GB RAM. The Enblend program wouldn't handle all 42 segments at once so I
had to do it in 4 sections and then piece them together in Photoshop.

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:47:00 +0000 (UTC), wald
<arnout.standaert@n*o_s-p%a|m.cit.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:

> (Annika1980) wrote:
>
>> Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
>> This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two)
>> eight-megapixel images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II lens.
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original
>
>
>Now that we're talking panos anyway, here's one from my trip to
>Guatemala in september:
>
>http://perswww.kuleuven.ac.be/~u0039...pano_small.jpg
>
>It's the view from the Tajamulco volcano, the highest peak in
>Central America, done with a simple Canon Powershot A80 and Panorama
>Factory. It's a bit small, but I'm currently too lazy to post a
>bigger version...
>
>Enjoy,
>Wald

Bad crop dude, where did the ground go?

...getting vertigo..

...falling..

...aaaagh!..

--
Owamanga!

Owamanga <> wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:47:00 +0000 (UTC), wald
> <arnout.standaert@n*o_s-p%a|m.cit.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>
>> (Annika1980) wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, panoramic fans, here's one you might not believe.
>>> This is a stitched panoramic taken from 42 (yes, forty-two)
>>> eight-megapixel images from the 20D and the 50mm f.1.8 II
>>> lens.
>>>
>>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36405442/original
>>
>>
>>Now that we're talking panos anyway, here's one from my trip to
>>Guatemala in september:
>>
>>http://perswww.kuleuven.ac.be/
~u0039093/dl/Tajamulco_pano_small.j
>>pg
>>
>>It's the view from the Tajamulco volcano, the highest peak in
>>Central America, done with a simple Canon Powershot A80 and
>>Panorama Factory. It's a bit small, but I'm currently too lazy
>>to post a bigger version...
>>
>>Enjoy,
>>Wald
>
> Bad crop dude, where did the ground go?

Well, the air was more interesting, and it was too f***ing cold up
there to shoot another series

Wald