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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Panorama Resolution Limits

Expand Messages
  • Trausti Hraunfjord
    ... km high.... MOAP (Mother Of All Panoramas), miniaturizing Mt. Everest, which is only a little under 9 km s above sea level where highest. Many thanks
    Message 1 of 8 , May 30, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      :) ouch! 27 million pixels ... that's a panorama 72 kilometers wide and 36
      km high.... MOAP (Mother Of All Panoramas), miniaturizing Mt. Everest,
      which is "only" a little under 9 km's above sea level where highest.

      Many thanks for the numbers, quite interesting to think about.

      Trausti

      On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 3:23 AM, hd_de_2000 <der@...> wrote:

      >
      >
      > If you're not concerend with DOF, then the only parameter determining
      > resolution is the physical aperture size, ~2.4m for the Hubble telescope.
      > This would be a panorama 27 million pixel wide, and the hyperfocal distance
      > 10568km. From these results you can conclude that we have miserable wether
      > right now preventing me from riding my bike.
      >
      > Helmut Dersch
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Keith Martin
      ... There s no hard-wired link between pixel count and physical size. At 300ppi (approx 118 pixels/cm) you d be looking at a panorama of only 1.42 miles or
      Message 2 of 8 , May 30, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        >:) ouch! 27 million pixels ... that's a panorama 72 kilometers wide

        There's no hard-wired link between pixel count and physical size. At
        300ppi (approx 118 pixels/cm) you'd be looking at a panorama of only
        1.42 miles or 2.28 km wide...

        ...heh. Did I really say "only"?

        k
      • prague
        hey groovy, that s the width of this pano - 192000 pixels :-) http://www.360cities.net/prague-18-gigapixels it seems that any larger gigapixels out there have
        Message 3 of 8 , May 31, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          hey groovy, that's the width of this pano - 192000 pixels :-)

          http://www.360cities.net/prague-18-gigapixels

          it seems that any larger gigapixels out there have been refocused to shoot each row (which i did not do, shooting this)

          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "hd_de_2000" <der@...> wrote:
          >
          > While browsing some online gigapixel panoramas, I wondered what physical resolution limits exist based on fundamental optical laws. Combining diffraction limit & depth-of-field formulas yields a universal minimum hyperfocal distance h for photographing 360 degree panoramas:
          >
          > h = width^2 * 1.39 * 10^-8 m
          >
          > Some numbers: w=10000 pixel: h=1.39m
          > w=192000 pixel: h=512m
          >
          > This limit is independent of lens and sensor, but may not be reached with some lens/sensor combinations.
          >
          > For close-up panoramas a similar formula for the minimum object distance a and a desired depth-of-field da may be derived:
          >
          > a/h = da/a (da << a)
          >
          > Example: if the desired depth of field is +/- 10%, then with the same numbers as above, the minimum object distance is 0.139m fo the 10000 pixel wide panorama, and 51.2m for the 192000 pixel wide panorama.
          >
          >
          > Helmut Dersch
          >
          > PS
          > The exact formula is
          > h = width^2 * lambda/(4*pi^2).
          > Probably someone has calculated that before, but I did find no reference.
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.