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

EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer

Expand Messages
  • Peter
    Have you seen this announcement? http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986 Your thoughts?
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Have you seen this announcement?

      http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986

      Your thoughts?
    • Bostjan Burger
      I have no a clue what is a 3D panorama ;) 3D is for me that picture from a Blade Runer when the opearator zooms into the picture and than inside the picture
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        I have no a clue what is a "3D panorama" ;)
        3D is for me that picture from a Blade Runer when the opearator zooms into the
        picture and than inside the picture moves the angle of view, even back to to the
        operator. I was enthusiastic with "3D" screens but found out only stereo
        display, like Avatar is not 3D, but only stereo. (or I am maybe wrong...)

        Bostjan



        ________________________________
        From: Peter <peter@...>
        To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 12:33:31 PM
        Subject: [PanoToolsNG] EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer


        Have you seen this announcement?

        http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986

        Your thoughts?


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ken Warner
        It s so easy even your parakeet can do it.
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          It's so easy even your parakeet can do it.

          Peter wrote:
          > Have you seen this announcement?
          >
          > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
          >
          > Your thoughts?
          >
          >
        • Ned Chiariello
          Anyone can write a book, draw a picture or take a photograph but are they good? A TV dinner doesn t make you a chief. ... [Non-text portions of this message
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Anyone can write a book, draw a picture or take a photograph but are they good? A TV dinner doesn't make you a chief.

            On Apr 21, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Peter wrote:

            > Have you seen this announcement?
            >
            > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
            >
            > Your thoughts?
            >
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • bryant_arnett
            The people at u-scapeit are using the term 3D incorrectly for sure. This is just an app to make 360 panoramas. Nothing 3D about it. However, I would
            Message 5 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              The people at u-scapeit are using the term "3D" incorrectly for sure. This is just an app to make 360 panoramas. Nothing 3D about it.

              However, I would definitely call Avatar a 3D movie. To me, "3D" stands for "Third Dimension" meaning that there is a dimension of Depth added to the first two dimensions of Width and Height. A flat image on a screen only has Height and Width. With a 3D movie your viewpoint is fixed, but there are still three dimensions being displayed, and therefore a stereo viewing system must be enabled (as a human, you can perceive TWO viewpoints, and therefore three dimensions). For the Blade Runner scenario, a variable viewpoint would need to be enabled, which the current 3D movie technology does not allow. If you have a variable viewpoint but are viewing a 2 dimensional image (as in a "3D" video game), then you are essentially viewing a 3D environment with a 2D display. In other words, you don't see the third dimension of depth UNLESS you are moving the viewpoint. Viewing a stereo image with a variable viewpoint is the ultimate goal of Virtual Reality technology, and can only be achieved when the image is being created in a computer in real-time, which a movie like Avatar is not.

              Try playing the Avatar computer game on a large high-definition screen using a stereo viewing system. THAT's some serious Third Dimension Virtual Reality going on there!

              OK this is all making my brain hurt. I'll stop now.

              ```````````Bryant



              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
              >
              > I have no a clue what is a "3D panorama" ;)
              > 3D is for me that picture from a Blade Runer when the opearator zooms into the
              > picture and than inside the picture moves the angle of view, even back to to the
              > operator. I was enthusiastic with "3D" screens but found out only stereo
              > display, like Avatar is not 3D, but only stereo. (or I am maybe wrong...)
              >
              > Bostjan
              >
              >
              >
              > ________________________________
              > From: Peter <peter@...>
              > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 12:33:31 PM
              > Subject: [PanoToolsNG] EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer
              >
              >
              > Have you seen this announcement?
              >
              > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
              >
              > Your thoughts?
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • Bostjan Burger
              I case of Avatar and so called 3D movies I would rather say 2.5 D but definitely not 3D. Boštjan ________________________________ From: bryant_arnett
              Message 6 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                I case of Avatar and "so called" 3D movies I would rather say "2.5 D" but
                definitely not 3D.

                Boštjan



                ________________________________
                From: bryant_arnett <mail3@...>
                To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 7:24:07 PM
                Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer




                The people at u-scapeit are using the term "3D" incorrectly for sure. This is
                just an app to make 360 panoramas. Nothing 3D about it.

                However, I would definitely call Avatar a 3D movie. To me, "3D" stands for
                "Third Dimension" meaning that there is a dimension of Depth added to the first
                two dimensions of Width and Height. A flat image on a screen only has Height and
                Width. With a 3D movie your viewpoint is fixed, but there are still three
                dimensions being displayed, and therefore a stereo viewing system must be
                enabled (as a human, you can perceive TWO viewpoints, and therefore three
                dimensions). For the Blade Runner scenario, a variable viewpoint would need to
                be enabled, which the current 3D movie technology does not allow. If you have a
                variable viewpoint but are viewing a 2 dimensional image (as in a "3D" video
                game), then you are essentially viewing a 3D environment with a 2D display. In
                other words, you don't see the third dimension of depth UNLESS you are moving
                the viewpoint. Viewing a stereo image with a variable viewpoint is the ultimate
                goal of Virtual Reality technology, and can only be achieved when the image is
                being created in a computer in real-time, which a movie like Avatar is not.

                Try playing the Avatar computer game on a large high-definition screen using a
                stereo viewing system. THAT's some serious Third Dimension Virtual Reality going
                on there!

                OK this is all making my brain hurt. I'll stop now.

                ```````````Bryant


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • bryant_arnett
                But, don t you think there is a dimension of Depth being presented in a 3D movie? I sure do. I love 3D movies. However, I think it s important to be seated
                Message 7 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  But, don't you think there is a dimension of Depth being presented in a 3D movie? I sure do. I love 3D movies. However, I think it's important to be seated directly in the center of the screen. When people watch a 3D movie from way off axis, I can't imagine they are really enjoying the effect.

                  I have had a nearly impossible time getting a good demonstration of a 3D television at any of the local stores. Every time I ask to see a demo, the salesman disappears for a while to find the glasses. Then they come back and tell me it's not working, or they finally set me up with a boring CGI loop of an aquarium. At Fry's a few months ago the guy finally got me set up with a display, but the left and right images were reversed. The glasses were shuttering out of phase, so my left eye was seeing the right eye image and vice versa. It created a weird inverse diorama effect that made me feel like my eyes were being ripped in half. The scary thing is, the salesmen could not understand or see what I was talking about! He said "That's the way it always has been" and he never personally liked the 3D effect, and he said most of his customers felt the same way. BUT THEY WERE SEEING IT WRONG!! No matter how hard I tried to explain what was wrong, he never got it.

                  Fortunately, I have also seen some very good demonstrations of 3D television, and I LOVED it. I really felt like I was seeing a true three-dimensional image. If you have not experienced good 3D TV, keep pushing for it. Make sure you are close to the screen and directly in the center. It has the potential for a breathtaking experience.

                  ```````Bryant







                  --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I case of Avatar and "so called" 3D movies I would rather say "2.5 D" but
                  > definitely not 3D.
                  >
                  > Boštjan
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ________________________________
                  > From: bryant_arnett <mail3@...>
                  > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                  > Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 7:24:07 PM
                  > Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > The people at u-scapeit are using the term "3D" incorrectly for sure. This is
                  > just an app to make 360 panoramas. Nothing 3D about it.
                  >
                  > However, I would definitely call Avatar a 3D movie. To me, "3D" stands for
                  > "Third Dimension" meaning that there is a dimension of Depth added to the first
                  > two dimensions of Width and Height. A flat image on a screen only has Height and
                  > Width. With a 3D movie your viewpoint is fixed, but there are still three
                  > dimensions being displayed, and therefore a stereo viewing system must be
                  > enabled (as a human, you can perceive TWO viewpoints, and therefore three
                  > dimensions). For the Blade Runner scenario, a variable viewpoint would need to
                  > be enabled, which the current 3D movie technology does not allow. If you have a
                  > variable viewpoint but are viewing a 2 dimensional image (as in a "3D" video
                  > game), then you are essentially viewing a 3D environment with a 2D display. In
                  > other words, you don't see the third dimension of depth UNLESS you are moving
                  > the viewpoint. Viewing a stereo image with a variable viewpoint is the ultimate
                  > goal of Virtual Reality technology, and can only be achieved when the image is
                  > being created in a computer in real-time, which a movie like Avatar is not.
                  >
                  > Try playing the Avatar computer game on a large high-definition screen using a
                  > stereo viewing system. THAT's some serious Third Dimension Virtual Reality going
                  > on there!
                  >
                  > OK this is all making my brain hurt. I'll stop now.
                  >
                  > ```````````Bryant
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • pedro_silva58
                  i can shoot panoramas, can you fly? said he...
                  Message 8 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "i can shoot panoramas, can you fly?" said he...

                    --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > It's so easy even your parakeet can do it.
                    >
                    > Peter wrote:
                    > > Have you seen this announcement?
                    > >
                    > > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
                    > >
                    > > Your thoughts?
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • Bostjan Burger
                    3D effect ... that is right term, that is exactly what 2.5D means, but it is still not 3D. For the commercial purpose it is used 3D - it would be most
                    Message 9 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      "3D effect" ... that is right term, that is exactly what 2.5D means, but it is
                      still not 3D. For the commercial purpose it is used 3D - it would be most
                      probably hard to explain people what is 2.5, but "3D effect" would be right I
                      suppose. When I started with VRML in mid 90-ies and found VRPanoramas in 98, I
                      also thought that is kind of 3D as some VRMLs were implemented into java based
                      VRPs, but I found out, when I started with the implementation of VRPs into
                      geographic documentation, that I was wrong.
                      I believe that some day in a very near future we will have real 3D movies which
                      will be projected into our rooms or even more possible, that the interface will
                      be mounted directly to our nerve system and eyes won't be needed for the
                      consumption... ok... now I sailed to Sci-Fi...

                      Boštjan




                      ________________________________
                      From: bryant_arnett <mail3@...>
                      To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Thu, April 21, 2011 9:21:44 PM
                      Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: EveryScape -- Now anyone can be a pano photographer


                      But, don't you think there is a dimension of Depth being presented in a 3D
                      movie? I sure do. I love 3D movies. However, I think it's important to be seated
                      directly in the center of the screen. When people watch a 3D movie from way off
                      axis, I can't imagine they are really enjoying the effect.

                      I have had a nearly impossible time getting a good demonstration of a 3D
                      television at any of the local stores. Every time I ask to see a demo, the
                      salesman disappears for a while to find the glasses. Then they come back and
                      tell me it's not working, or they finally set me up with a boring CGI loop of an
                      aquarium. At Fry's a few months ago the guy finally got me set up with a
                      display, but the left and right images were reversed. The glasses were
                      shuttering out of phase, so my left eye was seeing the right eye image and vice
                      versa. It created a weird inverse diorama effect that made me feel like my eyes
                      were being ripped in half. The scary thing is, the salesmen could not understand
                      or see what I was talking about! He said "That's the way it always has been" and
                      he never personally liked the 3D effect, and he said most of his customers felt
                      the same way. BUT THEY WERE SEEING IT WRONG!! No matter how hard I tried to
                      explain what was wrong, he never got it.

                      Fortunately, I have also seen some very good demonstrations of 3D television,
                      and I LOVED it. I really felt like I was seeing a true three-dimensional image.
                      If you have not experienced good 3D TV, keep pushing for it. Make sure you are
                      close to the screen and directly in the center. It has the potential for a
                      breathtaking experience.

                      ```````Bryant


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • bryant_arnett
                      I ll be the first to sign up for the direct neural interface, as soon as it s made available! I ve been waiting for such a thing since I saw the movie
                      Message 10 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I'll be the first to sign up for the direct neural interface, as soon as it's made available! I've been waiting for such a thing since I saw the movie Brainstorm in 1983. :)

                        I guess we are really discussing semantics. Throughout my life, the term 3D is used properly when discussing an image that has perceived depth through the use of a stereo viewing system. My grandma's stereoscope provided a 3D display, as did my Viewmaster when I was a kid. It sounds like what you are calling 3D, I would call a hologram. If what you are looking for is an image projected into a room, and you can walk all around it and see it from all sides, that goes beyond 3D, and I would refer to it as holography.

                        I'm curious, how would you define "...real 3D movies..." as opposed to a movie like Avatar?

                        And just to stay on topic, I will reiterate that the people at Everyscape and uscapeit.com are NOT using the term "3D" properly, by ANY definition. :)

                        `````````Bryant

                        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bostjan Burger <si_lander@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > "3D effect" ... that is right term, that is exactly what 2.5D means, but it is
                        > still not 3D. For the commercial purpose it is used 3D - it would be most
                        > probably hard to explain people what is 2.5, but "3D effect" would be right I
                        > suppose. When I started with VRML in mid 90-ies and found VRPanoramas in 98, I
                        > also thought that is kind of 3D as some VRMLs were implemented into java based
                        > VRPs, but I found out, when I started with the implementation of VRPs into
                        > geographic documentation, that I was wrong.
                        > I believe that some day in a very near future we will have real 3D movies which
                        > will be projected into our rooms or even more possible, that the interface will
                        > be mounted directly to our nerve system and eyes won't be needed for the
                        > consumption... ok... now I sailed to Sci-Fi...
                        >
                        > Boštjan
                        >
                      • Roger D. Williams
                        On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 04:21:44 +0900, bryant_arnett ... I have a similar problem even in tech-savvy Japan. The huge BIC Camera store near
                        Message 11 of 14 , Apr 21, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 04:21:44 +0900, bryant_arnett <mail3@...>
                          wrote:

                          > I have had a nearly impossible time getting a good demonstration of a 3D
                          > television at any of the local stores. Every time I ask to see a demo,
                          > the salesman disappears for a while to find the glasses. Then they come
                          > back and tell me it's not working, or they finally set me up with a
                          > boring CGI loop of an aquarium. At Fry's a few months ago the guy
                          > finally got me set up with a display, but the left and right images were
                          > reversed. The glasses were shuttering out of phase, so my left eye was
                          > seeing the right eye image and vice versa. It created a weird inverse
                          > diorama effect that made me feel like my eyes were being ripped in half.
                          > The scary thing is, the salesmen could not understand or see what I was
                          > talking about! He said "That's the way it always has been" and he never
                          > personally liked the 3D effect, and he said most of his customers felt
                          > the same way. BUT THEY WERE SEEING IT WRONG!! No matter how hard I tried
                          > to explain what was wrong, he never got it.
                          >
                          > Fortunately, I have also seen some very good demonstrations of 3D
                          > television, and I LOVED it. I really felt like I was seeing a true
                          > three-dimensional image. If you have not experienced good 3D TV, keep
                          > pushing for it. Make sure you are close to the screen and directly in
                          > the center. It has the potential for a breathtaking experience.

                          I have a similar problem even in tech-savvy Japan. The huge BIC Camera
                          store near where I have lunch when I'm in town (Tokyo) is doing Fujifilm
                          a serious disservice by failing to demonstrate its 3D cameras properly.

                          The stereo LCD screen (which doesn't require glasses and you would think
                          might be immune to problems) is usually so badly adjusted that you cannot
                          get the true stereo effect, and whenever I have complained I get the
                          "No, that's how it IS" reply, which is infuriating. Occasionally it can
                          be seen working, and then the HD movie display is fascinating!

                          When it comes to 3D glasses the situation is even worse. The SONY 3D
                          TV with shutter glasses is capable of giving a very good stereo effect
                          but the glasses have to be switched on, require batteries to work, and
                          need to be adjusted to the particular screen image. I have NEVER seen
                          them working properly in this store, and I try every time I walk past,
                          which is several times a month. The Panasonic TVs, on the other hand,
                          are often working reasonably well but the glasses are fixed to a
                          stand that cannot be adjusted for my height, and I have to hunker
                          down to see anything. Not conducive to enjoyment...

                          This is no way to sell 3D TVs! No wonder consumer response is apathetic.
                          If I hadn't been a fan of stereo photography since I was a boy in the
                          first heyday of stereo in the 1950s I don't think I would be interested
                          in it. Not based on what BIC Camera shows, anyway.

                          Roger W.

                          --
                          Work: www.adex-japan.com
                        • robert
                          ... Decided to try it, using a iPhone 3G so not as good as it might be with a iPhone 4 or 5 but worth testing. And as expected it s pretty bad. Suggestion is
                          Message 12 of 14 , Apr 22, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" <peter@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Have you seen this announcement?
                            >
                            > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
                            >
                            > Your thoughts?

                            Decided to try it, using a iPhone 3G so not as good as it might be with a iPhone 4 or 5 but worth testing.

                            And as expected it's pretty bad. Suggestion is to take 40-60 seconds to rotate to capture the view. Then much to my surprise you have to upload the movie to their servers to get it "stitched" and wait for them to post it on their viewer. You can then make it public if you want to be associated with a fuzzy, low res, limited VFOV with stitching errors. :)

                            It must be using very similar tech or algorithms as this:

                            http://www.softoptics.co.uk/

                            But since this can us any camera (?) with any rectilinear lens (?) - they say they are working in fisheye support too. I would expect the quality to be much, much better. Plan on testing this soon too as it does some other cool things too.

                            Regards,

                            Robert
                            >
                          • jan.vrsinsky
                            I personally like the new Microsoft Photosyth app better. With UScapeIt, you have to record a video, which means you never know which parts of the spherical
                            Message 13 of 14 , Apr 22, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I personally like the new Microsoft Photosyth app better. With UScapeIt, you have to record a video, which means you never know which parts of the spherical panorama you have already captured and which you are missing. Also with my iPhone 3GS that is missing a gyro it totally failed to stitch my attempt to make a 360 of my hallway at home as you can see here
                              http://media3.everyscape.com/TOURX/686/11686/INDEX.HTML

                              With photosynth I was much more successful since it shows you which parts of the pano you are missing and which remain to be captured. However, it still doesn't work perfectly on 3GS especially around nadir and zenith where the stitcher is really confused. You can see my photosynth test here
                              http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=9c7bf04c-d2fe-4240-a4b8-99e66ad50166

                              In general, these apps make it super easy to capture 360-degree photos, yes. I treat them as toys. They are very easy to try and the good thing about them is that they deliver this ability to general public, making the whole concept understandable to everybody. This can never be bad for any industry.

                              Now, does it make one work worth less? Yes, definitely, unfortunately. The technology is getting better, the costs of equipment and stitching is going downhill so yes, definitely this will lower prices. Toys like Uscapeit and Photosynth will not replace high quality 360-degree spherical virtual tours done with precision, love and years of experience. But they will replace the low quality ones because people will be able to do the low quality stuff on their own or with a help of friends. This is a never-ending process. Costs will go down and the quality required to make a living will have to go up.

                              How do 360-degree photographers have to react to this trend? Buy better tools, learn more awesome tricks, be unique, do better marketing, deliver their work with some kind of twist or joint value with something else. Learn how to do underwater or aerial photos. Or something. Learn how to excel with quality. Learn how to sell better. I know a lot of photographers at 360cities.net that have just totally incredibly great panoramas they produce as hobby in their free time. The quality of the overall experience must go up. What worked 5 years ago won't work today commercially.

                              That's the only answer and the only solution. There is no coming back. There's also hope in this message, though. The world is changing. And exciting times are ahead for everybody.

                              ---
                              Jan
                              twitter.com/janvrsinsky
                              (360cities.net)





                              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" <peter@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Have you seen this announcement?
                              >
                              > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
                              >
                              > Your thoughts?
                              >
                            • Chuck
                              ... Hi Kygos, Glad that UScapeit has gotten your forum talking! As panoramic photographers, your forum is definitely a more specialized audience and for this
                              Message 14 of 14 , Apr 22, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > It's so easy even your parakeet can do it.
                                >
                                > Peter wrote:
                                > > Have you seen this announcement?
                                > >
                                > > http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/283986
                                > >
                                > > Your thoughts?
                                > >
                                > >Reply from Everyscape
                                >


                                Hi Kygos,

                                Glad that UScapeit has gotten your forum talking! As panoramic photographers, your forum is definitely a more specialized audience and for this audience, I'd agree that 2.5D is a more accurate representation of what we've produced with the current iteration of UScapeit. However, future iterations of UScapeit will incorporate some of the more advanced EveryScape features like you can see in this scape of The Breakers: http://thebreakers.supertour.com/?page=#p=1228597&y=227.43&pi=0&sbm=mwelcome&sbtsi=index



                                Our processing technology that enables us to connect two panoramas (which you can preview by clicking on the blue arrows in the scape above) adds a layer of depth to better approximate that third dimension. This same technology can be used to build fully immersive 3D environments from the exact same panoramic photography used to create The Breakers scape.



                                I'd love to get further feedback from members of your forum, as we're interested in hearing from users so that we can improve future iterations of the app. Feel free to direct them to our forum at:

                                http://getsatisfaction.com/uscapeit/



                                Thanks,

                                Rebecca



                                Rebecca MacQuarrie

                                Director of Marketing/Director of Ambassador Program

                                EveryScape

                                65 Chapel St.

                                Newton, MA 02458

                                (p) 781.250.4763 | (f) 781.893.5797

                                (e) rebecca@... | www.everyscape.com
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.