On 31 Jul 2009 at 21:04, Ian Wood wrote:
> On 31 Jul 2009, at 20:17, robert_harshman wrote:
> > And I agree with you that the details are not quite the same, but
> > the overall room is, the windows, columns, carpet, chandeliers and
> > even the chairs and tables bear a similar look and feel. At least by
> > my eyes I think the 3D model was based on this room and at least
> > should give some credit to it. The same 3D modeler has another
> > version of this room on the site that uses windows that are
> > definitely more explicit copies from this room. But if you and
> > others do not see that then that's that.
> Definitely nice panos, but I have to agree that the 3D model is not
> based on the panorama. It's not that *some* of the details are not
> wuite the same, it's that *all* the details are different.
> I'm not sure how many dealings you've had with creating 3D models from
> panoramas but I'd be very surprised if they had used your pano as the
> basis for the model. Things like the differences in the shape of the
> seat backs (and having detail on the rear of the seats), different
> carpet designs etc. would have made it *more* work for the modeller to
> start from your panorama than to start from scratch and/or their own
> reference photos.
> It's also unlikely that your pano was used as a source for textures,
> as every surface I've looked at closely is different from the actual
> room - for instance herringbone parquet in the panorama and straight
> floorboards in the model, different paintings in the panels, most of
> the flat surfaces such as wooden surfaces using stock textures etc.
> The model is clearly based on that room, but then so is the
> panorama. ;-)
And/or that room in Chicago (as well as the 3D model) is most likely based on one or more
different, similar rooms in Europe ;)
Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no
- panoramas and 3D