Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: New Panoramas for critique

Expand Messages
  • erik leeman
    Hi Mahmood Hamidi, Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing shimmers on my screen than the QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Mahmood Hamidi,

      Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing 'shimmers' on my screen than the
      QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the
      trees. Unless a viewer is capable of (hardware supported) anti-
      aliasing it will always be there if there is any sharply defined
      detail in a moving image. Make murky, low-res VR's and it's gone, and
      so will be al detail and image quality. Let's hope viewing technology
      will catch up with high quality content soon.
      May I suggest an adjustment of your FOV settings?
      With VR's like these I think it would be better to use these:
      max FOV = 80
      min FOV = 45
      initial FOV = 60
      Zooming out as far as is possible now serves absolutely no purpose
      (in my mind at least) and zooming in all the way only reveals ugly
      compression artefacts, not detail. The initial FOV of 60 makes the
      image a little more 'quiet' regarding aliasing noise without limiting
      the view too much.
      Other than that I think the image is a bit 'greyish' overall. I
      certainly don't like oversaturated images, but this looks a bit too
      flat to me. Do you use a calibrated monitor? If you don't maybe you
      should consider buying the necessary gear, it really can make a huge
      difference!

      Regards,

      erik leeman

      (www.erikleeman.com)
    • jann_lipka
      Mahmood, Sorry I was not clear about power cables Here comes a screen shot ( QTVR versions ) - comparison of NK Pano of yours with a similar pano crop of
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 1, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Mahmood,
        Sorry I was not clear about "power cables "

        Here comes a screen shot ( QTVR versions ) - comparison
        of NK Pano of yours with a similar
        pano crop of my own .mov file .

        http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a3/Jann_Lipka/Bild236-1.jpg



        Keep the good work coming .

        regards
      • Mahmood Hamidi
        Hi Erik, Thank you for your response. I suspect that you have looke on Nacka Strand (4) , but might be wrong. There are 3 others in that serie which I suspect
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 2, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Erik,

          Thank you for your response.
          I suspect that you have looke on "Nacka Strand (4)", but might be
          wrong. There are 3 others in that serie which I suspect show more
          shimmerings in water that (4) as no sharpening was applied to the
          water in that one.
          Also, regarding the saturation, I agree that this last nr 4 was the
          greyest of all and therefore increased the it a little bit, how does
          it look like now?
          Or do you think that the others also suffer of the same flatness?

          Mahmood

          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "erik leeman" <erik.leeman@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi Mahmood Hamidi,
          >
          > Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing 'shimmers' on my screen than the
          > QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the
          > trees. Unless a viewer is capable of (hardware supported) anti-
          > aliasing it will always be there if there is any sharply defined
          > detail in a moving image. Make murky, low-res VR's and it's gone, and
          > so will be al detail and image quality. Let's hope viewing technology
          > will catch up with high quality content soon.
          > May I suggest an adjustment of your FOV settings?
          > With VR's like these I think it would be better to use these:
          > max FOV = 80
          > min FOV = 45
          > initial FOV = 60
          > Zooming out as far as is possible now serves absolutely no purpose
          > (in my mind at least) and zooming in all the way only reveals ugly
          > compression artefacts, not detail. The initial FOV of 60 makes the
          > image a little more 'quiet' regarding aliasing noise without limiting
          > the view too much.
          > Other than that I think the image is a bit 'greyish' overall. I
          > certainly don't like oversaturated images, but this looks a bit too
          > flat to me. Do you use a calibrated monitor? If you don't maybe you
          > should consider buying the necessary gear, it really can make a huge
          > difference!
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          > erik leeman
          >
          > (www.erikleeman.com)
          >
        • erik leeman
          Hi Mahmood, Please be very careful with increasing saturation of a finished pano, especially if it is only 8 bits in colourdepth! You ll get ugly posterization
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 2, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Mahmood,

            Please be very careful with increasing saturation of a finished pano,
            especially if it is only 8 bits in colourdepth! You'll get ugly
            posterization (did I spell that correctly?) in clear skies and other
            relatively featureless areas if you overdo it just the slightest bit!
            It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope you
            work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
            already have.
            I'll have a look at the others and PM you, OK?

            Regards,

            erik leeman

            (www.erikleeman.com)
          • Mahmood Hamidi
            ... Well, I corrected the saturation on my almost finished pano. It was 16-bit tiff, extracted from RAW though, all the way to the stiched pano. Mahmood
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 2, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              --- "erik leeman" <erik.leeman@...> wrote:

              > It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope you
              > work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
              > already have.

              Well, I corrected the saturation on my "almost finished" pano.
              It was 16-bit tiff, extracted from RAW though, all the way to the
              stiched pano.

              Mahmood
            • Carel
              ... Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 2, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Rookie2 wrote:
                >
                > .............
                > How does the shimmering look on your computer with this panorama moving?
                >
                > Deval VR:
                > http://www.360mh.com/ns04_dv.html
                >
                > QTVR:
                > http://www.360mh.com/ns04.html
                >
                > Regarding the size, it got smaller than the others in the serie.
                > N.S. 01: 3062 KB
                > N.S. 02: 2675 KB
                > N.S. 03: 2309 KB
                > N.S. 04: 2154 KB
                >
                > Regards,
                > Mahmood
                >
                >

                Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just
                an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed
                varies considerably from country to country and broadband speed is much
                slower between continents. I therefore usually also compress the tiles
                separately, compressing much more for the nadir unless there is something of
                interest to see there. Usually my compression is: Pano2QTvr quality setting:
                60 for Zenith (watch for banding in blue sky), 70 for four around and 40 for
                nadir. I also sharpen on a separate layer and then mask out all the
                unimportant parts.

                Carel Struycken

                --
                View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-Panoramas-for-critique-tf4364550.html#a12455350
                Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.