Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Unlimited Megapixels

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Unlimited Megapixels

 
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2010
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:27:22 +0000, bugbear wrote:

> ray wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:57:14 -0500, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>>
>>> When you stitch together two or more images, does that double, triple,
>>> etc the number of pixels in the resultant image and file, or does the
>>> program resample it to the count of just one frame or something? If it
>>> does add, then you could turn a 10 mp camera into a 30 mp by just
>>> stitching together three verticals of your scene.
>>>
>>> Gary Eickmeier

>>
>> You 'could' except for the fact that you need some overlap in order to
>> accomplish the 'stitching' - 30% is often recommended.

>
> Yeah - 30% provides enough overlapping pixels that the programs can
> pretty much intuit everything they need to know from the images.
>
> Most people (including me) work that way.
>
> But if you have a fully calibrated camera/lens combination, and a
> precision stepping pano head (or robot), you can get away with minimal
> overlap.


From the tone of the OP's question, I'd guess he does not. The point is,
that to seamlessly integrate, there still has to be some overlap - the OP
seemed to be under the impression that was not necessary.


>
> BugBear


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2010
> NOW - another good question is - is there some software that allows us
> to view a pano from within a small part of it and "sweep" around in it
> left or right, as in a real estate tour of a room or something? I have
> seen some of these tours that have full periphery images in which you
> can view a whole room and turn right or left, up or down. But if I could
> only go left or right in a simple pano, maybe even a full 360 pano, that
> would be great.
>
> Gary Eickmeier


Something like these, perhaps?

http://www.gentles.info/KAP/Gallery/Pano2010/index.htm

Cheers,
David

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2010
On Nov 19, 4:40*am, "Gary Eickmeier" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "ray" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:27:22 +0000, bugbear wrote:

>
> >> ray wrote:
> >> But if you have a fully calibrated camera/lens combination, and a
> >> precision stepping pano head (or robot), you can get away with minimal
> >> overlap.

>
> > From the tone of the OP's question, I'd guess he does not. The point is,
> > that to seamlessly integrate, there still has to be some overlap - the OP
> > seemed to be under the impression that was not necessary.

>
> It was a simple question about whether the pixels add up or not. Any idiot
> can see that you would subtract the overlap from the total.
>
> NOW - another good question is - is there some software that allows us to
> view a pano from within a small part of it and "sweep" around in it left or
> right, as in a real estate tour of a room or something? I have seen some of
> these tours that have full periphery images in which you can view a whole
> room and turn right or left, up or down. But if I could only go left or
> right in a simple pano, maybe even a full 360 pano, that would be great.


I known Stitcher 5.5 did that, but it was quite an expensive app.
I can;t remember what setting I used but there were options that
created different sorts of pans
including an interesting cube. I think the option you're looking for
is to save a file as QTVR.
(Quicktime Virtual reality)
 
Reply With Quote
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2010
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:40:35 -0500, Gary Eickmeier wrote:

> "ray" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:27:22 +0000, bugbear wrote:
>>
>>> ray wrote:

>
>>> But if you have a fully calibrated camera/lens combination, and a
>>> precision stepping pano head (or robot), you can get away with minimal
>>> overlap.

>>
>> From the tone of the OP's question, I'd guess he does not. The point
>> is, that to seamlessly integrate, there still has to be some overlap -
>> the OP seemed to be under the impression that was not necessary.

>
> It was a simple question about whether the pixels add up or not. Any
> idiot can see that you would subtract the overlap from the total.
>


I didn't know what kind of idiot I was dealing with - thanks for making
it obvious.

Please reread the OP - "two or more images, does that double, triple, etc
the number of pixels". The OP had no concept that overlap was required.

> NOW - another good question is - is there some software that allows us
> to view a pano from within a small part of it and "sweep" around in it
> left or right, as in a real estate tour of a room or something? I have
> seen some of these tours that have full periphery images in which you
> can view a whole room and turn right or left, up or down. But if I could
> only go left or right in a simple pano, maybe even a full 360 pano, that
> would be great.


Any decent photo viewer will allow you to view a photo at full resolution
and pan around to your heart's content. I use gwenview - it does that
quite well.


>
> Gary Eickmeier


 
Reply With Quote
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2010
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 13:18:11 -0500, Gary Eickmeier wrote:

> "ray" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Please reread the OP - "two or more images, does that double, triple,
>> etc the number of pixels". The OP had no concept that overlap was
>> required.

>
> I am the OP.
>
> Let me clarify this whole thing, since it has to do more with
> communication than knowledge of photography.
>
> I worded the question the way I did on the assumption that it would be
> obvious that you need some overlap of the images to be able to match
> them up, and rather difficult to shoot a panorama so perfectly that the
> edges matched precisely with no overlap. We also know that automatic
> stitching programs, such as Photoshop or Elements, need some overlap to
> function.
>
> So my question was not so much about overlap as whether you could create
> a 30 or 40 megapixel image with a 10 megapixel camera. That is a
> wonderful discovery, and I haven't seen much written about it. Also,
> there are some cameras that can do the stitching internally with the
> processor, and I find it hard to imagine that they would then create
> these huge images. So they probably resample them down to something
> manageable. One of my main reasons for wanting to do these panos is real
> estate tours, which would be shared on the web for the clients, and you
> wouldn't want that big a file to upload or download - but you might for
> other purposes.
>
> I also realize that you need a level tripod that you can rotate like a
> video head if you want to do a complete 360, so that the ends will match
> up and there will be minimal cropping. Leveling the tripod head is
> another whole area of discussion (without spending a fortune I mean).


In order to do it properly, you'll also need the axis of rotation to run
through the lens nodal point - otherwise there will be distortion when
you try to merge. If you're far away, it may not be noticeable - if
you're 'close' it will be.

>
> So assuming that most readers would already know that you need some
> overlap to be able to match up images for a panorama, I pressed on and
> asked a simple question about whether the pixels would add up as big as
> you want. I suppose I could have said would they double, triple, etc
> except for overlap, but it didn't seem necessary at the time. I assumed
> the wrong level of knowledge of the reader.
>>
>> Any decent photo viewer will allow you to view a photo at full
>> resolution and pan around to your heart's content. I use gwenview - it
>> does that quite well.

>
> What exactly do you mean by "photo viewer"? What I am after is something
> that just about everyone has already on their computers so that they can
> just click on your link and see your slideshow of panos of a home, or a
> site, and look around in them. I will try the gwenview. Haven't seen
> that.


A photo viewer is software that allows you to view photos. Seems I
assumed the wrong level of knowledge of the reader.


>
> Gary Eickmeier


 
Reply With Quote
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2010
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 16:49:41 -0500, Gary Eickmeier wrote:

> "ray" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> A photo viewer is software that allows you to view photos. Seems I
>> assumed the wrong level of knowledge of the reader.

>
> If I already knew what you meant by that, I wouldn't have asked. If you
> don't want to tell me, then get off the pot.


Don't really know what more you're after. I've told you what it does and
given you a specific example of one. Photoshop, GIMP, etc are image
editors - they allow you to make changes and view photos. A viewer has
rather primitive editing capabilities if at all - it's primary use is to
allow you to view photos.


>
> Gary Eickmeier


 
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
Re: Megapixels - An Explanation of Megapixels and How They AffectPhotos Rob Digital Photography 0 10-17-2012 11:31 PM
Re: Megapixels - An Explanation of Megapixels and How They AffectPhotos jdanield Digital Photography 0 10-17-2012 06:56 PM
Unlimited Calls Packags: Update(d)! - There or nearly there!? - £2/3 per month unlimited price range News Reader UK VOIP 13 03-03-2007 05:02 PM
39 megapixels? 31 megapixels? Get 'em here ... Bill Hilton Digital Photography 7 07-18-2005 08:37 PM



Advertisments