Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > really big images

Reply
Thread Tools

really big images

 
 
hfs2
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.

I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
whole thing.
I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
'image' their
painting.

Questions I have about this are.

I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
software to
stitch together a matrix of photos.

Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
$500?
I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
make
each cell look just a little different.

Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
multiple
shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
automatically no
matter how bad the registration.

Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
great
way to collect art.

Thanks

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:31:06 -0800, hfs2 wrote:

> I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
>
> I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
> whole thing.
> I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
> 'image' their
> painting.
>
> Questions I have about this are.
>
> I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
> software to
> stitch together a matrix of photos.


Yes - same software - stitches vertically as well as horizontally.

>
> Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> $500?


Yes, you can do that pretty well with the Kodak P850 - and shoot raw
files, as well. Got a refurb unit a few weeks ago from the online Kodak
store for $250.

> I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
> make
> each cell look just a little different.
>
> Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
> multiple
> shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
> automatically no
> matter how bad the registration.


You need to try the pano-tools. Yes, you can pretty much indicate where
each photo goes.


>
> Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
> great
> way to collect art.
>
> Thanks


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
hfs2
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
Thanks fo r the info. I was just playing with some number. a 24x36
painting, rendered
at 600/inch would be almost 300MP. That's 37 shot with you camera. I
wonder if
this even doable. I would be work. I wonder if the software and a 1GB
PC could
handle it. Thanks again. (Numbers seem right?)

ray wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:31:06 -0800, hfs2 wrote:
>
> > I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
> >
> > I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
> > whole thing.
> > I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
> > 'image' their
> > painting.
> >
> > Questions I have about this are.
> >
> > I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
> > software to
> > stitch together a matrix of photos.

>
> Yes - same software - stitches vertically as well as horizontally.
>
> >
> > Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> > $500?

>
> Yes, you can do that pretty well with the Kodak P850 - and shoot raw
> files, as well. Got a refurb unit a few weeks ago from the online Kodak
> store for $250.
>
> > I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
> > make
> > each cell look just a little different.
> >
> > Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
> > multiple
> > shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
> > automatically no
> > matter how bad the registration.

>
> You need to try the pano-tools. Yes, you can pretty much indicate where
> each photo goes.
>
>
> >
> > Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
> > great
> > way to collect art.
> >
> > Thanks


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ken Lucke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
hfs2 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
>
> I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
> whole thing.
> I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
> 'image' their
> painting.
>
> Questions I have about this are.
>
> I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
> software to
> stitch together a matrix of photos.


Same software, usually. PTGui works well. Panorammas are not limited
to a single dimension of sequential images.

> Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> $500?
> I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
> make
> each cell look just a little different.


Not if you, as you say, "lock down the settings" - it's called Manual
Mode.

> Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
> multiple
> shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
> automatically no
> matter how bad the registration.


Sometimes you have to assist. No, scratch that. Almost always, you
have to assist. But it's merely tedious, not hard.

> Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
> great
> way to collect art.
>
> Thanks
>


--
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
independence.
-- Charles A. Beard
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scott W
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
hfs2 wrote:
> Thanks fo r the info. I was just playing with some number. a 24x36
> painting, rendered
> at 600/inch would be almost 300MP. That's 37 shot with you camera. I
> wonder if
> this even doable. I would be work. I wonder if the software and a 1GB
> PC could
> handle it. Thanks again. (Numbers seem right?)

600 ppi is pretty high but if you really wanted to capture at the res
it can be done with a computer with 1 GB of ram, which is what I happen
to have. I have done images close to 400 ppi, things do get a bit slow
at that size. With overlap you are probably looking at a lot more then
37 photos, I am thinking more like 60 to 80, which is handle easily by
PTGui.

If you cut your resolution down to 300 PPI you are now looking at less
then 80MP, which is very easy.

Scott

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ken Lucke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed). com>, hfs2
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Thanks fo r the info. I was just playing with some number. a 24x36
> painting, rendered
> at 600/inch would be almost 300MP.


DPI is irrelevant to cameras. DPI only pertains to _printing_
resolution, and is therefore not something you factor into your
photographs.

> That's 37 shot with you camera.


You're forgetting overlap, which is normally 25% or more to allow
enough control points and blending to make a good panorama (I shoot
almost 50% overlap just to be sure, as I don't use a pano head).

> I
> wonder if
> this even doable.


Why not? I recently made a rather unimpressive panorama with 38 10.1
megapixel shots which came out to be about 140 megapixels (before
cropping to eliminate curveature). ABout 90 MP after cropping.

> I would be work. I wonder if the software and a 1GBPC
> could
> handle it.


Sure, why not? It might take a while (whether you mean 1GB [as in
memory] or 1ghz [as in speed]), but it should eventually crunch through
it.

> Thanks again. (Numbers seem right?)


No.

> ray wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:31:06 -0800, hfs2 wrote:
> >
> > > I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
> > >
> > > I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
> > > whole thing.
> > > I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
> > > 'image' their
> > > painting.
> > >
> > > Questions I have about this are.
> > >
> > > I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
> > > software to
> > > stitch together a matrix of photos.

> >
> > Yes - same software - stitches vertically as well as horizontally.
> >
> > >
> > > Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> > > $500?

> >
> > Yes, you can do that pretty well with the Kodak P850 - and shoot raw
> > files, as well. Got a refurb unit a few weeks ago from the online Kodak
> > store for $250.
> >
> > > I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
> > > make
> > > each cell look just a little different.
> > >
> > > Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
> > > multiple
> > > shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
> > > automatically no
> > > matter how bad the registration.

> >
> > You need to try the pano-tools. Yes, you can pretty much indicate where
> > each photo goes.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
> > > great
> > > way to collect art.



Why not just buy prints? You'd have better quality, and every major
classic painting can probably be purchased as a print somewhere.

--
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
independence.
-- Charles A. Beard
 
Reply With Quote
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:59:22 -0800, hfs2 wrote:

> Thanks fo r the info. I was just playing with some number. a 24x36
> painting, rendered
> at 600/inch would be almost 300MP. That's 37 shot with you camera. I
> wonder if
> this even doable. I would be work. I wonder if the software and a 1GB
> PC could
> handle it. Thanks again. (Numbers seem right?)
>
> ray wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:31:06 -0800, hfs2 wrote:
>>
>> > I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
>> >
>> > I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
>> > whole thing.
>> > I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
>> > 'image' their
>> > painting.
>> >
>> > Questions I have about this are.
>> >
>> > I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
>> > software to
>> > stitch together a matrix of photos.

>>
>> Yes - same software - stitches vertically as well as horizontally.
>>
>> >
>> > Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
>> > $500?

>>
>> Yes, you can do that pretty well with the Kodak P850 - and shoot raw
>> files, as well. Got a refurb unit a few weeks ago from the online Kodak
>> store for $250.
>>
>> > I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
>> > make
>> > each cell look just a little different.
>> >
>> > Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
>> > multiple
>> > shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
>> > automatically no
>> > matter how bad the registration.

>>
>> You need to try the pano-tools. Yes, you can pretty much indicate where
>> each photo goes.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
>> > great
>> > way to collect art.
>> >
>> > Thanks


Methinks you overstate the requirements a bit. I found out several years
ago that, in spite of all the 'conventional wisdom' you can print out a
1mp image at 8x10 and you really can't tell it from a photo unless you get
right down on it with a magnifier.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Ilya Zakharevich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006
[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
hfs2
<(E-Mail Removed)>], who wrote in article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>:
> Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> $500?


You are not not *forced* to lock all the settings. It will just make
life a tiny bit easier when stitching. Most dataflows with stitching
allow automatic compensation for exposure/color differences.

With 1GB memory, and 10GB free space on disk, you should be able to
handle up to about 240MP panoramas (with most demanding dataflows);
maybe even larger stuff.

I need a lot of manual intervention to make a 60MP stitch on a laptop
with 256M memory and 1G of OS-accessible hard disk space...

Hope this helps,
Ilya
 
Reply With Quote
 
tomm42
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2006


On Dec 20, 8:31 pm, "hfs2" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I have access to a great big printer in our advertising dept.
>
> I read about this Giga Pix photo months ago and was fascinated by the
> whole thing.
> I could have a Vincent van Gogh from the Mpls Art Inst. if they would
> 'image' their
> painting.
>
> Questions I have about this are.
>
> I know there is software to stitch panoramas together. Is there
> software to
> stitch together a matrix of photos.
>
> Is there a camera where you lock down all the settings and doesn't cost
> $500?
> I assume as you take each cell, an automatic camera would readjust and
> make
> each cell look just a little different.
>
> Are there x-x tables that are made to help 'map' a large image into
> multiple
> shots for later reconstruction. Or does software just find seams
> automatically no
> matter how bad the registration.
>
> Help me here. I suppose someone is already doing this. Sounds like a
> great
> way to collect art.
>
> Thanks


The MFA in Boston does this with paintings, rather than using panoramic
tools they use a scanning back on a 4x5 and use special lighting, so
that the print looks like an oil painting. Don't think any museum would
allow you to take multiple images of a hanging painting, or use an XY
rig.

Tom

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GIDS 2009 .Net:: Save Big, Win Big, Learn Big: Act Before Dec 29 2008 Shaguf ASP .Net 0 12-26-2008 09:29 AM
GIDS 2009 .Net:: Save Big, Win Big, Learn Big: Act Before Dec 29 2008 Shaguf ASP .Net Web Controls 0 12-26-2008 06:11 AM
GIDS 2009 Java:: Save Big, Win Big, Learn Big: Act Before Dec 29 2008 Shaguf Python 0 12-24-2008 07:35 AM
GIDS 2009 Java:: Save Big, Win Big, Learn Big: Act Before Dec 29 2008 Shaguf Ruby 0 12-24-2008 05:07 AM
Big JARs = Big Problems? kk_oop@yahoo.com Java 11 09-18-2005 05:54 PM



Advertisments