really big images

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by hfs2, Dec 21, 2006.

  1. hfs2

    hfs2 Guest

    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
     
    hfs2, Dec 21, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. hfs2

    ray Guest

    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
     
    ray, Dec 21, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. hfs2

    hfs2 Guest

    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
     
    hfs2, Dec 21, 2006
    #3
  4. hfs2

    Ken Lucke Guest

    In article <>,
    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.


    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
     
    Ken Lucke, Dec 21, 2006
    #4
  5. hfs2

    Scott W Guest

    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
     
    Scott W, Dec 21, 2006
    #5
  6. hfs2

    Ken Lucke Guest

    In article <>, 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.


    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
     
    Ken Lucke, Dec 21, 2006
    #6
  7. hfs2

    ray Guest

    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.
     
    ray, Dec 21, 2006
    #7
  8. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    hfs2
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > 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
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Dec 21, 2006
    #8
  9. hfs2

    tomm42 Guest

    On Dec 20, 8:31 pm, "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.
    >
    > 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
     
    tomm42, Dec 21, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ART SANTELLA

    HOW DO I GET BIG BIG ENLARGEMENT OF PIX?

    ART SANTELLA, Aug 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    523
  2. Lucas Tam

    How do you get really big fresh looking roses to grow

    Lucas Tam, Apr 16, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    389
  3. JWBH

    better big optical zoom or big megapixels?

    JWBH, Feb 27, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    38
    Views:
    938
  4. Annika1980

    REALLY BIG BIRDS LOVE THE 40D !

    Annika1980, Oct 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    77
    Views:
    1,706
    John Turco
    Oct 30, 2007
  5. Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,616
    Lookout
    Jan 30, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page