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

Re: Immersive video camera

Expand Messages
  • prague
    I see some serious misunderstandings about panoramic video cameras. People complain about the resolution of the ladybug cameras, yet even those videos
    Message 1 of 16 , Dec 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I see some serious misunderstandings about panoramic video cameras. People complain about the resolution of the ladybug cameras, yet even those videos published on the web are too big load and enjoy by most people.

      what is it that you want exactly, bostjan?
      who do you want to show these videos to?
      on the web? or in a cinema on a 4k projector? they'd require completely different hardware.
      can your computer really handle the raw streams of multiple cameras that are 2 or 4 megapixels each (which I presume is what you need, bostjan, if the sensors of the ladybug 3 are too low)

      (I'm not defending Ladybug btw - their stitching and colors for me leave a lot to be desired)


      in reality, if you want to actually show 360 video to people, you're stuck with the Web, and thus a low resolution.

      otherwise, you can buy 2 or 3 canon 5d mk2 cameras - cheaper than ladybug, higher rez. here is a sample:

      interactive -
      http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta
      flat -
      http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta/video.avi
      (THANKS to sacha griffin for shooting it.)
      (warning, big-ass heavy file (as I said - this is higer resolution than needed for web, using a codec that isn't meant for this application.))

      Finally - if you want higher resolution than ladybug3, using cameras you're going to source yourself, you will pay more than $20,000, and you'll have a LOT of unforeseen problems. I know ;-)

      Jeffrey


      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
      >
      > I am
      > planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a
      > Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my
      > work. Any suggestions?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • luca vascon
      I would go for a number of RED cameras with 4.5 Sigma or Nikon 10.5 fisheyes on them. ... They are small enough to be compacted in a small package. OR, a big
      Message 2 of 16 , Dec 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        I would go for a number of RED cameras with 4.5 Sigma or Nikon 10.5
        fisheyes on them.
        :-)
        They are small enough to be compacted in a small package.
        OR, a big RED camera facing a mirror. Selfbuilt one. www.ottichezen.it

        2009/12/1 prague <360cities@...>:
        >
        > I see some serious misunderstandings about panoramic video cameras. People complain about the resolution of the ladybug cameras, yet even those videos published on the web are too big load and enjoy by most people.
        >
        > what is it that you want exactly, bostjan?
        > who do you want to show these videos to?
        > on the web? or in a cinema on a 4k projector? they'd require completely different hardware.
        > can your computer really handle the raw streams of multiple cameras that are 2 or 4 megapixels each (which I presume is what you need, bostjan, if the sensors of the ladybug 3 are too low)
        >
        > (I'm not defending Ladybug btw - their stitching and colors for me leave a lot to be desired)
        >
        >
        > in reality, if you want to actually show 360 video to people, you're stuck with the Web, and thus a low resolution.
        >
        > otherwise, you can buy 2 or 3 canon 5d mk2 cameras - cheaper than ladybug, higher rez. here is a sample:
        >
        > interactive -
        > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta
        > flat -
        > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta/video.avi
        > (THANKS to sacha griffin for shooting it.)
        > (warning, big-ass heavy file (as I said - this is higer resolution than needed for web, using a codec that isn't meant for this application.))
        >
        > Finally - if you want higher resolution than ladybug3, using cameras you're going to source yourself, you will pay more than $20,000, and you'll have a LOT of unforeseen problems. I know ;-)
        >
        > Jeffrey
        >
        >
        > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
        >>
        >> I am
        >> planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a
        >> Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my
        >> work. Any suggestions?
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > --
        >
        >
        >
        >



        --
        Luca Vascon.

        www.canalview.it
        www.officinepanottiche.com
      • Jim Watters
        You could try a bunch of Elphel cameras http://community.elphel.com/pictures/elphel354-10-open.jpg ... -- Jim Watters http://photocreations.ca
        Message 3 of 16 , Dec 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          You could try a bunch of Elphel cameras
          http://community.elphel.com/pictures/elphel354-10-open.jpg

          >>
          >> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
          >>
          >>> I am
          >>> planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a
          >>> Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my
          >>> work. Any suggestions?
          >>>
          --
          Jim Watters
          http://photocreations.ca
        • Bostjan Burger
          Thanks......what I saw is a very good quality video but I found only wide panoramic samples with smooth streaming (btw.. I don t need it for a web, so heavy
          Message 4 of 16 , Dec 1, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks......what I saw is a very good quality video but I found only wide panoramic samples with smooth streaming (btw.. I don't need it for a web, so heavy files are not a problem). Still digging Elphel to find some full 360° immersive video samples.
            :) Bostjan



            --- On Wed, 12/2/09, Jim Watters <jwatters@...> wrote:

            From: Jim Watters <jwatters@...>
            Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Immersive video camera
            To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Wednesday, December 2, 2009, 7:32 AM
















             









            You could try a bunch of Elphel cameras

            http://community. elphel.com/ pictures/ elphel354- 10-open.jpg



            >>

            >> --- In PanoToolsNG@ yahoogroups. com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@. ..> wrote:

            >>

            >>> I am

            >>> planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a

            >>> Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my

            >>> work. Any suggestions?

            >>>

            --

            Jim Watters

            http://photocreatio ns.ca






























            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • tom_a_sparks
            ... the was/is a discount if you can submit source code back to elphel under gpl :) if you could write this under gpl
            Message 5 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
              >
              > Thanks......what I saw is a very good quality video but I found only wide panoramic samples with smooth streaming (btw.. I don't need it for a web, so heavy files are not a problem). Still digging Elphel to find some full 360° immersive video samples.
              > :) Bostjan

              the was/is a discount if you can submit source code back to elphel under gpl :)

              if you could write this under gpl
              http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20081120/161500/

              there is your discount :)

              tom sparks
              PS: see http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/message/27945 for early talk about this idea
            • jrgen_schrader
              Probably you meant these: http://www.costruzioniottichezen.com/ Would love to browse their waste bin, though ;) Jürgen
              Message 6 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Probably you meant these:
                http://www.costruzioniottichezen.com/

                Would love to browse their waste bin, though ;)

                Jürgen

                --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, luca vascon <luca.vascon@...> wrote:
                >
                > I would go for a number of RED cameras with 4.5 Sigma or Nikon 10.5
                > fisheyes on them.
                > :-)
                > They are small enough to be compacted in a small package.
                > OR, a big RED camera facing a mirror. Selfbuilt one. www.ottichezen.it
                >
                > 2009/12/1 prague <360cities@...>:
                > >
                > > I see some serious misunderstandings about panoramic video cameras. People complain about the resolution of the ladybug cameras, yet even those videos published on the web are too big load and enjoy by most people.
                > >
                > > what is it that you want exactly, bostjan?
                > > who do you want to show these videos to?
                > > on the web? or in a cinema on a 4k projector? they'd require completely different hardware.
                > > can your computer really handle the raw streams of multiple cameras that are 2 or 4 megapixels each (which I presume is what you need, bostjan, if the sensors of the ladybug 3 are too low)
                > >
                > > (I'm not defending Ladybug btw - their stitching and colors for me leave a lot to be desired)
                > >
                > >
                > > in reality, if you want to actually show 360 video to people, you're stuck with the Web, and thus a low resolution.
                > >
                > > otherwise, you can buy 2 or 3 canon 5d mk2 cameras - cheaper than ladybug, higher rez. here is a sample:
                > >
                > > interactive -
                > > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta
                > > flat -
                > > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta/video.avi
                > > (THANKS to sacha griffin for shooting it.)
                > > (warning, big-ass heavy file (as I said - this is higer resolution than needed for web, using a codec that isn't meant for this application.))
                > >
                > > Finally - if you want higher resolution than ladybug3, using cameras you're going to source yourself, you will pay more than $20,000, and you'll have a LOT of unforeseen problems. I know ;-)
                > >
                > > Jeffrey
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@> wrote:
                > >>
                > >> I am
                > >> planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a
                > >> Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my
                > >> work. Any suggestions?
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >>
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ------------------------------------
                > >
                > > --
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                > --
                > Luca Vascon.
                >
                > www.canalview.it
                > www.officinepanottiche.com
                >
              • luca vascon
                Yesss.. Here he is.. ... -- Luca Vascon. www.canalview.it www.officinepanottiche.com
                Message 7 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Yesss..
                  Here he is..
                  :-)

                  2009/12/2 jrgen_schrader <panorama@...>:
                  > Probably you meant these:
                  > http://www.costruzioniottichezen.com/
                  >
                  > Would love to browse their waste bin, though ;)
                  >
                  > Jürgen
                  >
                  > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, luca vascon <luca.vascon@...> wrote:
                  >>
                  >> I would go for a number of RED cameras with 4.5 Sigma or Nikon 10.5
                  >> fisheyes on them.
                  >> :-)
                  >> They are small enough to be compacted in a small package.
                  >> OR, a big RED camera facing a mirror. Selfbuilt one. www.ottichezen.it
                  >>
                  >> 2009/12/1 prague <360cities@...>:
                  >> >
                  >> > I see some serious misunderstandings about panoramic video cameras. People complain about the resolution of the ladybug cameras, yet even those videos published on the web are too big load and enjoy by most people.
                  >> >
                  >> > what is it that you want exactly, bostjan?
                  >> > who do you want to show these videos to?
                  >> > on the web? or in a cinema on a 4k projector? they'd require completely different hardware.
                  >> > can your computer really handle the raw streams of multiple cameras that are 2 or 4 megapixels each (which I presume is what you need, bostjan, if the sensors of the ladybug 3 are too low)
                  >> >
                  >> > (I'm not defending Ladybug btw - their stitching and colors for me leave a lot to be desired)
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> > in reality, if you want to actually show 360 video to people, you're stuck with the Web, and thus a low resolution.
                  >> >
                  >> > otherwise, you can buy 2 or 3 canon 5d mk2 cameras - cheaper than ladybug, higher rez. here is a sample:
                  >> >
                  >> > interactive -
                  >> > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta
                  >> > flat -
                  >> > http://vrlog.net/temp/panoramic-video/atlanta/video.avi
                  >> > (THANKS to sacha griffin for shooting it.)
                  >> > (warning, big-ass heavy file (as I said - this is higer resolution than needed for web, using a codec that isn't meant for this application.))
                  >> >
                  >> > Finally - if you want higher resolution than ladybug3, using cameras you're going to source yourself, you will pay more than $20,000, and you'll have a LOT of unforeseen problems. I know ;-)
                  >> >
                  >> > Jeffrey
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@> wrote:
                  >> >>
                  >> >> I am
                  >> >> planning to buy a camera for a hi quality immersive video. I have tested a
                  >> >> Ladbug2 but it is a poor quality. Even Ladybug3 with 2Mpix is not with a good quality for my
                  >> >> work. Any suggestions?
                  >> >>
                  >> >>
                  >> >>
                  >> >>
                  >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >> >>
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> > ------------------------------------
                  >> >
                  >> > --
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> --
                  >> Luca Vascon.
                  >>
                  >> www.canalview.it
                  >> www.officinepanottiche.com
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > --
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >



                  --
                  Luca Vascon.

                  www.canalview.it
                  www.officinepanottiche.com
                • Roger D. Williams
                  I was interested in this (Elphel camera) too, but the prices page was broken. Roger W. On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:28:20 +0900, Bostjan Burger
                  Message 8 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I was interested in this (Elphel camera) too, but the prices page was
                    broken.

                    Roger W.


                    On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:28:20 +0900, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...>
                    wrote:

                    > Thanks......what I saw is a very good quality video but I found only
                    > wide panoramic samples with smooth streaming (btw.. I don't need it for
                    > a web, so heavy files are not a problem). Still digging Elphel to find
                    > some full 360° immersive video samples.
                    > :) Bostjan
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > --- On Wed, 12/2/09, Jim Watters <jwatters@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > From: Jim Watters <jwatters@...>
                    > Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Immersive video camera
                    > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                    > Date: Wednesday, December 2, 2009, 7:32 AM
                    >
                    > You could try a bunch of Elphel cameras
                    >
                    > http://community. elphel.com/ pictures/ elphel354- 10-open.jpg


                    --
                    Business: www.adex-japan.com
                    Pleasure: www.usefilm.com/member/roger
                  • Jim Watters
                    ... I found this blog entry talking about using Elphel cameras for panoramic video. http://blogs.elphel.com/2009/11/temporary-diversion/#more-703 -- Jim
                    Message 9 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Bostjan Burger wrote:
                      > Still digging Elphel to find some full 360° immersive video samples.
                      > :) Bostjan
                      >
                      I found this blog entry talking about using Elphel cameras for panoramic
                      video.
                      http://blogs.elphel.com/2009/11/temporary-diversion/#more-703


                      --
                      Jim Watters

                      jwatters@...
                      http://photocreations.ca
                    • crane@ukonline.co.uk
                      ... I was thinking about this again the other day and I wondered about 2 mirrors like a periscope spinning in the centre and at right angles to a stationary
                      Message 10 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Quoting Jim Watters <jwatters@...>:

                        > Bostjan Burger wrote:
                        > > Still digging Elphel to find some full 360° immersive video samples.
                        > > :) Bostjan
                        > >
                        > I found this blog entry talking about using Elphel cameras for panoramic
                        > video.
                        > http://blogs.elphel.com/2009/11/temporary-diversion/#more-703

                        I was thinking about this again the other day and I wondered about 2 mirrors
                        like a periscope spinning in the centre and at right angles to a stationary
                        circular array of cameras which it triggers to fire in sequence. It would need
                        to spin at whatever the frame rate was per second. eg 25.
                        I hadn't thought about a window to protect the mirror but I guess that could be
                        spinning as well.

                        regards

                        Mick

                        ----------------------------------------------
                        This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
                      • Bostjan Burger
                        Thanks ...Andrey sent is to me today to my p.e. It is interesting concept. ... From: Jim Watters Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re:
                        Message 11 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks ...Andrey sent is to me today to my p.e. It is interesting concept.
                          :) Bostjan

                          --- On Wed, 12/2/09, Jim Watters <jwatters@...> wrote:

                          From: Jim Watters <jwatters@...>
                          Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Immersive video camera
                          To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                          Date: Wednesday, December 2, 2009, 5:01 PM
















                           









                          Bostjan Burger wrote:

                          > Still digging Elphel to find some full 360° immersive video samples.

                          > :) Bostjan

                          >

                          I found this blog entry talking about using Elphel cameras for panoramic

                          video.

                          http://blogs. elphel.com/ 2009/11/temporar y-diversion/ #more-703



                          --

                          Jim Watters



                          jwatters@photocreat ions.ca

                          http://photocreatio ns.ca






























                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Christian Bloch
                          Sort of like this? http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/ConcaveSurroundOptics/ ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Message 12 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Sort of like this?
                            http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/ConcaveSurroundOptics/


                            On Dec 2, 2009, at 8:21 AM, crane@... wrote:

                            > I was thinking about this again the other day and I wondered about 2 mirrors
                            > like a periscope spinning in the centre and at right angles to a stationary
                            > circular array of cameras which it triggers to fire in sequence. It would need
                            > to spin at whatever the frame rate was per second. eg 25.
                            > I hadn't thought about a window to protect the mirror but I guess that could be
                            > spinning as well.



                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • crane@ukonline.co.uk
                            ... sort of the right shape. the circular mirror would be the cameras and the camera a mirror. cheers mick ... This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
                            Message 13 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Quoting Christian Bloch <Blochi@...>:

                              > Sort of like this?
                              > http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/ConcaveSurroundOptics/

                              sort of the right shape. the circular mirror would be the cameras and the camera
                              a mirror.
                              cheers
                              mick

                              ----------------------------------------------
                              This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.