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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] ptadjust plugin

Expand Messages
  • Jim Watters
    ... There has been several discussions on this list as to what should be the optimal dimensions for cube faces when extracting them to make a QTVR. For 90 deg
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 2, 2008
      crane@... wrote:
      > hello,
      > can somebody smarter than me tell me what is the relationship between the
      > horizontal field of view and the width size in the ptadjust photoshop plugin
      > from epaperpress when extracting a rectilinear from an equirectangular.
      > I'd like to extract a 90 degree horizontal view but then have a bit extra
      > either side please.
      >
      > regards
      >
      > mick
      >
      >
      There has been several discussions on this list as to what should be the
      optimal dimensions for cube faces when extracting them to make a QTVR.
      For 90 deg use width / pi for optimal, to ensure no loss of detail width / 3

      What you want to do is keep the same (or a little better) pixels per
      degree as the original. For more details see Resolution of Various
      Panorama Formats http://www.worldserver.com/turk/quicktimevr/panores.html


      --
      Jim Watters

      jwatters @ photocreations . ca
      http://photocreations.ca
    • crane@ukonline.co.uk
      ... That doesn t explain very clearly, assumes a lot of prior understanding. eg: The focal length is defined as the distance to the imaging surface at the
      Message 2 of 5 , Dec 3, 2008
        Quoting Jim Watters <jwatters@...>:

        > What you want to do is keep the same (or a little better) pixels per
        > degree as the original. For more details see Resolution of Various
        > Panorama Formats http://www.worldserver.com/turk/quicktimevr/panores.html

        That doesn't explain very clearly, assumes a lot of prior understanding.
        eg:
        "
        The focal length is defined as the distance to the imaging surface at the
        center of projection.

        For a cubic panorama, this is the distance to the center of one of the faces.
        "
        I have no idea how to calculate that.

        regards


        mick

        > Jim Watters


        ----------------------------------------------
        This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
      • crane@ukonline.co.uk
        ... yes I know i am replying to my own post. has anybody explained in terms that are readily understandable what happens to the arithmetic from real world to
        Message 3 of 5 , Dec 3, 2008
          > Quoting Jim Watters <jwatters@...>:
          >
          > > What you want to do is keep the same (or a little better) pixels per
          > > degree as the original. For more details see Resolution of Various
          > > Panorama Formats http://www.worldserver.com/turk/quicktimevr/panores.html
          >
          > That doesn't explain very clearly, assumes a lot of prior understanding.
          > eg:
          > "
          > The focal length is defined as the distance to the imaging surface at the
          > center of projection.
          >
          > For a cubic panorama, this is the distance to the center of one of the faces.
          >
          > "
          > I have no idea how to calculate that.

          yes I know i am replying to my own post.

          has anybody explained in terms that are readily understandable what happens to
          the arithmetic from real world to sensor image to stitching to projecting onto
          the monitor , in QT/ flash etc because I realize I do not have a clue as to
          the maths involved and I would like to.

          regards


          mick

          ----------------------------------------------
          This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
        • Erik Krause
          ... If you take fisheye images you have a more or less linear mapping between distances on the sensor and angles of view in the world. This is: A certain pixel
          Message 4 of 5 , Dec 3, 2008
            crane wrote:
            > has anybody explained in terms that are readily understandable what
            > happens to
            > the arithmetic from real world to sensor image to stitching to
            > projecting onto
            > the monitor , in QT/ flash etc because I realize I do not have a clue as to
            > the maths involved and I would like to.

            If you take fisheye images you have a more or less linear mapping
            between distances on the sensor and angles of view in the world. This
            is: A certain pixel distance is always a certain angle distance, no
            matter where on the sensor you measure.

            For equirectangular images it is just the same: The width represents
            360° the height 180°, that's why the aspect ratio always is 2:1. How to
            calculate this is outlined on
            http://wiki.panotools.org/DSLR_spherical_resolution

            If it comes to rectilinear it gets a bit more complicated, since the
            mapping is a tangent one. But it gets fairly easy if you do it in
            geometry. Draw a circle. Now draw a surrounding square. Where the square
            touches the circle the pixel density is equal to that one of the circle.
            One cube face is the diameter of the circle wide. The diameter of the
            circle (and hence the cube face) is circumference / pi.

            If the square would not be surrounding but inside the circle, pixel
            information would be lost, because the information formerly on the
            circle must be compressed to a smaller distance, which means to less
            pixels. If you map to equirect again (or map to an arbitrary view in the
            viewer) this information can not be re-created.

            Hence if you extract a cube face from an equirectangular and you don't
            want to loose any information you need a cube face size of equirect
            width / pi.

            However, as Hans Nyberg demonstrated recently: If you remap from a
            maximum size equirect to cube faces for a viewer (be it Flash, QT or
            whatever) the best compromise between size and quality is at about 70%
            of that size, since any bayer interpolated image can be reduced by about
            70% with negligible loss of image quality. Hence you can divide equirect
            width by about 4.4 to get the optimum cube face size.

            --
            Erik Krause
            http://www.erik-krause.de
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.