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

Re: 360precision atome in google streetview

Expand Messages
  • Hans
    Jeffrey I could comment on this with just one word. Rubbish. However I want to ask you if you ever seen any one in forums or other comments besides Panorama
    Message 1 of 41 , Nov 1, 2011

      I could comment on this with just one word.

      However I want to ask you if you ever seen any one in forums or other comments besides Panorama photographers who does associate street view with what we do.

      Street view is a navigation tool and most people does not at all think of them as interactive panoramas.

      You may need to be logged in at Stumbleupon to read this.
      Here are 175 reviews on Panoramas.dk

      Is anyone talking about street view. No
      I have other pages with 400 to 600 reviews and I never seen a comment comparing them to street view.
      The same with comment from other forums.
      And I also never heard a customer mentioning street view.

      I never even seen anyone comment about the difference in navigation besides one you posted at some time.

      Some of us just imagine that street view has an impact on our work
      Do a search for panoramas in Google and you have to browse down to page 17 before you find the first one mentioning street view.


      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "prague" <panoramas@...> wrote:
      > Guys. And Girls. With all due respect....and excuse my occasionally foul language:
      > It's these universally negative responses that really gets me down about this community, and convinces me nearly completely that there will be NO great community of 360 photographers, NO great standards of data portability, NO great aggregator, NO central place for all things panoramic - there will be nothing like that. We are a bunch of perfectionist, bickering, jealous elitists who are digging our own grave with respect to this medium that deserves so much more (and which I have actually been devoting my entire working life to for the last 6 years)
      > Now, do you remember 5 or 6 years ago when you'd try to sell your services to someone, and they don't know what the fuck a QTVR or panoramic photo is (or whatever it is we call it, we can't even agree on that) ?
      > Nowadays, most web-using humans DO know what it is. Do you know why? It's because Google has made it *extremely* widespread. Yeah, they made images with some stitching errors in them. But you know what? They made something like 100 MILLION of these panoramas (total guess). Unless you are living under a rock, you HAVE seen these images, there is probably one of your house. Unless you are a great troll in total denial, these are images that are just like the ones you make (except they have additional 3d depth data as well as extremely precise georeferencing)
      > Yeah, and now they are trying to make panoramas inside. From what it looks like to me, they're using automatic exposure, bracketing, and some kind of exposure fusion to make the capture process entirely automatic. And you know what? Ask 50 NORMAL PEOPLE if they can tell the difference, and probably 45 of them won't be able to tell the difference between this low-cost version, and your painstakingly hand-made, retouched version. People just don't care about that. Admit it! Am I saying that you as a photographer should only produce lower-quality content? Of course not.
      > I think comparing one of these Google-produced panoramas with your own is completely missing the point. Everything Google does has the idea of massive scale behind it. The kind of scale that most people have simply never even thought about. How do you get to the hundreds of millions? The mind boggles. What if it results in a bit of ghosting from the automatic exposure bracketing? Who really gives a shit? We're talking about covering the ENTIRE WORLD, people.
      > Did you ever think about how maybe our medium (360 photography) might benefit if you lowered your standards a bit, and shot 100x more panoramas than you do now? And if the bar was lowered enough that "non photographers" could also make spherical panoramas without any trouble? This is the kind of stuff that will take this medium to the mainstream, and not make it get lost in geek obscurity. The great stuff will float to the top - it always does. (And these google interior panos, just like streetview, are only going to get better and better)
      > Make no mistake: the sentiments expressed so far in this thread (and many others) are not going to push this medium forward into further familiarity and popularity. Quite the opposite.
      > Now, I'm going to continue to help as many clueless people as possible learn how to make shitty panos. Because that's what we were all doing once, until we became good at it. And that's what is going to turn our tiny niche into something significant.
      > Sorry for the rant but seriously guys, I don't want to be alone making some obscure art with a tiny audience, patching nadirs that no one is going to see. But I have a feeling that many of you will do exactly that.
    • jrgen_schrader
      Thank you, Eduardo. I m glad to see there still seem to be people who understand what an open discussion means. I simply don t get why people can t live with
      Message 41 of 41 , Nov 4, 2011
        Thank you, Eduardo. I'm glad to see there still seem to be people who understand what an open discussion means. I simply don't get why people can't live with other peoples opinions, even not, when they take their time and explain their motivation in detail.

        Using killerphrases (if at all) is not the way to cultivate a discussion where people could benefit from.


        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Eduardo Hutter <montreal360@...> wrote:
        > I'm sorry, but this is a "discussion list". Discussion. And as such,
        > nothing more than discussions and exchange of information should be
        > expected, and that's precisely the goal of the list. Of course, 360Cities
        > being such a big player on the subject covered here, it will at some point
        > get into the *discussions*.
        > This is not trolling, it's a discussion. Not sharing the same point of
        > view, and strongly defending them , is not trolling. Even treating others
        > personal POVs with disdain and saying they cannot be reasoned with- no
        > matter the logic behind it, and no matter how much I disagree with that
        > kind of atittude, but hey, this isn't news -is not trolling.
        > Of course, personal attacks dont fit in this category and should be taken
        > elsewhere. But even then, personal attacks are not necessarely trolling.
        > regards,
        > Eduardo
        > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:40 AM, zen.alien <zenalien@...>wrote:
        > > **
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi Jeffrey...
        > >
        > > may I suggest to remember the rule #14 of the internet ?
        > >
        > > - Do not argue with trolls - It means that they win.
        > >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.