## Panorama calculator

Expand Messages
• Hello, Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need. I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot in order to achieve
Message 1 of 9 , Nov 27, 2010
Hello,

Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need.
I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot in order to achieve a stitched panorama.

You can find the calculator on the front page of my blog :
http://photos.yves.over-blog.com
or in the following subject :
http://photos.yves.over-blog.com/article-panorama-calculator-mise-a-jour-61831164.html

I hope you will enjoy it and give me some feedback in order to improve it.

Yves.
• Hello Yves, Thanks for sharing your Panorama Calculator, I tried it and it works really fine to calculate an optimized schema for shooting multi-row spherical
Message 2 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Hello Yves,

Thanks for sharing your Panorama Calculator, I tried it and it works really
fine to calculate an optimized schema for shooting multi-row spherical
panoramas.
With this optimized schema it is possible to shoot a pano with less images,
to process the images faster and still get a fine result.

For use with my Seitz VR Drive (a programmable motor drive) I have to set
the "Horizontal angular step" to 0,1 degree to get the proper number of
images calculated, this is because the drive calculates the rotation per
image based on a programmed number of images so the rotation is not fixed to
integer numbers (f.e. when shooting 17 images in a row the rotation is
360/17=21,18 degree per image)
When using a manual rotator then the minimum rotation that the rotator is
capable for has to be set (f.e. 10 degree when the max number of click stops
is 36).

The option to force a row at the horizon with a tilt of 0 degree is very
handy, this can avoid a lot of ghosting in the panorama.

Although I am not a big gigapan or mosaic shooter your Panorama Calculator
is also very handy for this purpose.

Thanks again,
Wim

--
View this message in context: http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/Panorama-calculator-tp3062175p3062264.html
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
• PS: I found out that when using Nabble to read PanoToolsNG messages that the link to your blog is crippled, the URL in Nabble is changed into:
Message 3 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
PS:

I found out that when using Nabble to read PanoToolsNG messages that the
link to your blog is crippled, the URL in Nabble is changed into:
http://photos.yves.over-blog.com/?by-user=t

The result is an error message, the URL should be:
http://photos.yves.over-blog.com

I will inform the owner of Nabble about the wrong behavior.

Wim

--
View this message in context: http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/Panorama-calculator-tp3062175p3062268.html
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
• ... Looks a bit complicated compared to http://www.frankvanderpol.nl/fov_pan_calc.htm but of course Frank s calculator doesn t work for multi rows. I didn t
Message 4 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Am 28.11.2010 06:55, schrieb aslanresimler:
> Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need.
> I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot in order to achieve a stitched panorama.
>
> You can find the calculator on the front page of my blog :
> http://photos.yves.over-blog.com

Looks a bit complicated compared to
http://www.frankvanderpol.nl/fov_pan_calc.htm
but of course Frank's calculator doesn't work for multi rows.

I didn't dare to activate macros, since this means a security risk. I
hope this doesn't affect the functionality.

The numbers given under "Results" are mistakable. It took me a while to
realize that the *total* number of images is meant, not the images per row.

What does the "Fisheye adjustment" value mean? None of the formulas I
know for fisheye FoV calculation needs an adjustment value:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Fisheye_Projection
However, those ideal formulas are seldom found in real world:
http://tinyurl.com/b9sgn
(scroll down to "2- Image mapping (distortion)") but those different
formulas don't use an adjustment value either...

The field "Focal length calculated" is nonsense. Focal length doesn't
change if the image is cropped, only FoV changes. This common
misconception is very much out of place in a panoramic calculator. Not
to mention that the calculation of an "as if" focal length is wrong for
fisheyes anyway.

Some hints:
- While calculate the Panorama size using sensor surface utilization
works relatively well for rectilinear lenses it gives wrong results for
fisheyes since effectively used sensor region isn't square. It's far
better to use the angular resolution, which makes the calculation
independent from overlap and number of images, at least for a full
spherical. See
http://wiki.panotools.org/DSLR_spherical_resolution for details.

- Image orientation is more commonly named "landscape" and "portrait" in
english, not "horizontal" and "vertical".

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de
• ... Seems as if all URLs not containing a path are treated this way. I already complained to nabble support:
Message 5 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Am 28.11.2010 11:20, schrieb Wim Koornneef:
> I found out that when using Nabble to read PanoToolsNG messages that the
> link to your blog is crippled, the URL in Nabble is changed into:
> http://photos.yves.over-blog.com/?by-user=t

Seems as if all URLs not containing a path are treated this way. I
http://nabble-support.1.n2.nabble.com/-tt5781485.html

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de
• Thank you for this feedback, I will see how to improve the file based on your comments. For the fisheye adjustment value, I took into account the fact that
Message 6 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Thank you for this feedback, I will see how to improve the file based on your comments.

For the fisheye adjustment value, I took into account the fact that there are for different categories of lens.
With the formula I took, there is a risk of having a difference between what you have in the formula and the reality.

Concerning the "as if" focal length, I think it can be useful for someone that is not an expert and is questioning himself.
I will correct the indication for fisheye.

Regards,
Yves.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Erik Krause <erik.krause@...> wrote:
>
> Am 28.11.2010 06:55, schrieb aslanresimler:
> > Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need.
> > I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot in order to achieve a stitched panorama.
> >
> > You can find the calculator on the front page of my blog :
> > http://photos.yves.over-blog.com
>
> Looks a bit complicated compared to
> http://www.frankvanderpol.nl/fov_pan_calc.htm
> but of course Frank's calculator doesn't work for multi rows.
>
> I didn't dare to activate macros, since this means a security risk. I
> hope this doesn't affect the functionality.
>
> The numbers given under "Results" are mistakable. It took me a while to
> realize that the *total* number of images is meant, not the images per row.
>
> What does the "Fisheye adjustment" value mean? None of the formulas I
> know for fisheye FoV calculation needs an adjustment value:
> http://wiki.panotools.org/Fisheye_Projection
> However, those ideal formulas are seldom found in real world:
> http://tinyurl.com/b9sgn
> (scroll down to "2- Image mapping (distortion)") but those different
> formulas don't use an adjustment value either...
>
> The field "Focal length calculated" is nonsense. Focal length doesn't
> change if the image is cropped, only FoV changes. This common
> misconception is very much out of place in a panoramic calculator. Not
> to mention that the calculation of an "as if" focal length is wrong for
> fisheyes anyway.
>
> Some hints:
> - While calculate the Panorama size using sensor surface utilization
> works relatively well for rectilinear lenses it gives wrong results for
> fisheyes since effectively used sensor region isn't square. It's far
> better to use the angular resolution, which makes the calculation
> independent from overlap and number of images, at least for a full
> spherical. See
> http://wiki.panotools.org/DSLR_spherical_resolution for details.
>
> - Image orientation is more commonly named "landscape" and "portrait" in
> english, not "horizontal" and "vertical".
>
> --
> Erik Krause
> http://www.erik-krause.de
>
• ... Since the adjustment value isn t used anywhere else it s not so helpful. Better to use the standard formula. ... No, please leave this away. It is a
Message 7 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Am 28.11.2010 13:51, schrieb aslanresimler:

> For the fisheye adjustment value, I took into account the fact that
> there are for different categories of lens. With the formula I took,
> there is a risk of having a difference between what you have in the
> formula and the reality.

Since the adjustment value isn't used anywhere else it's not so helpful.
Better to use the standard formula.

> Concerning the "as if" focal length, I think it can be useful for
> someone that is not an expert and is questioning himself.

No, please leave this away. It is a misconception which doesn't help
anyone. You don't need to be an expert to understand this.

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de
• Also, don t neglect Mr. Turkowski s calculators at eo ... [Non-text portions of this message
Message 8 of 9 , Nov 28, 2010
Also, don't neglect Mr. Turkowski's calculators at
<http://www.worldserver.com/turk/quicktimevr/calculators.html>

eo

On Nov 27, 2010, at 9:55 PM, aslanresimler wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need.
> I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot
> in order to achieve a stitched panorama.
>
> You can find the calculator on the front page of my blog :
> http://photos.yves.over-blog.com
> or in the following subject :
> http://photos.yves.over-blog.com/article-panorama-calculator-mise-a-jour-61831164.html
>
> I hope you will enjoy it and give me some feedback in order to
> improve it.
>
> Yves.
>
> __._,_._

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• Thank you, I will have a look at this link. Regards, Yves.
Message 9 of 9 , Nov 29, 2010
Thank you, I will have a look at this link.

Regards,
Yves.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Eric O'Brien <ericob@...> wrote:
>
> Also, don't neglect Mr. Turkowski's calculators at
> <http://www.worldserver.com/turk/quicktimevr/calculators.html>
>
> eo
>
> On Nov 27, 2010, at 9:55 PM, aslanresimler wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Here is a calculator I created on excel sheet for my own need.
> > I wanted to know the number of picture per row I would have to shoot
> > in order to achieve a stitched panorama.
> >
> > You can find the calculator on the front page of my blog :
> > http://photos.yves.over-blog.com
> > or in the following subject :
> > http://photos.yves.over-blog.com/article-panorama-calculator-mise-a-jour-61831164.html
> >
> > I hope you will enjoy it and give me some feedback in order to
> > improve it.
> >
> > Yves.
> >
> > __._,_._
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.