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

Re: 320

Expand Messages
  • Erik Krause
    ... If you zoom in you get a good resolution until there is a step where another image is loaded. Not perfectly registered and with different contrast. This
    Message 1 of 12 , Feb 22, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Am 22.02.2013 10:29, schrieb John Houghton:
      > A really impressive result with excellent sharpness maintained even
      > when zoomed right in. However there is a disturbing abrupt change in
      > image quality as you zoom out - and not a change for the better,
      > either. There's a nasty heavy handed processed look - presumably an
      > attempt to brighten up a dull, low contrast image.

      If you zoom in you get a good resolution until there is a step where
      another image is loaded. Not perfectly registered and with different
      contrast. This image doesn't add more details. It only increases the image.

      That's no surprise, since most likely this wasn't shot at f/4 which
      would be needed to produce an effective resolution of 320 GP for a
      spherical panorama. Higher aperture values cause more blurring due to
      diffraction. See http://wiki.panotools.org/Diffraction#Resolution for
      details. The extender doesn't increase the resolution since the
      effective aperture is changed as well: The table shows the same values
      for 800mm f/8 and 400mm f/4.

      This is the end of the gigapixel race.

      --
      Erik Krause
      http://www.erik-krause.de
    • hdrv
      ... your motivation is so small that i think this image is not worth looking at. Romuald
      Message 2 of 12 , Feb 23, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Le 22 févr. 13 à 03:20, Jeffrey Martin a écrit :

        > i stitched a new pano, shot by myself, holger schulze, and tom mills.
        >
        > we made it mostly to annoy hans nyberg but it also managed to get me
        > on TV yesterday.

        your motivation is so small that i think this image is not worth
        looking at.

        Romuald
      • SKAL
        ... I was not talking about the tower itself, but the pole where you installed the panohead ... :) SKAL
        Message 3 of 12 , Feb 24, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Il 22/02/2013 11:20, panokaemena@... ha scritto:
          > The pole has a hight of 177m http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower
          >
          >

          I was not talking about the tower itself, but the pole where you
          installed the panohead ... :)

          SKAL
        • Erik Krause
          ... I was informed that actually the panorama was shot at f/2.8 which means effective f/5.6 at 800mm. The diffraction limit for a spherical panorama shot with
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 16, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Am 22.02.2013 21:06, schrieb Erik Krause:
            > That's no surprise, since most likely this wasn't shot at f/4 which
            > would be needed to produce an effective resolution of 320 GP for a
            > spherical panorama. Higher aperture values cause more blurring due to
            > diffraction. Seehttp://wiki.panotools.org/Diffraction#Resolution for
            > details. The extender doesn't increase the resolution since the
            > effective aperture is changed as well: The table shows the same values
            > for 800mm f/8 and 400mm f/4.

            I was informed that actually the panorama was shot at f/2.8 which means
            effective f/5.6 at 800mm. The diffraction limit for a spherical panorama
            shot with that parameters is almost 900 gigapixel. Hence the resolution
            of the panorama is well within the physical limits. Sorry for false
            assumption!

            --
            Erik Krause
            http://www.erik-krause.de
          • Luca Vascon
            No need for a pole!! Only the stitch of 4 or more partial panos. 2013/2/24 SKAL ... -- Luca Vascon. -- www.lucavascon.net Questa è la mia
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 23, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              No need for a pole!!
              Only the stitch of 4 or more partial panos.


              2013/2/24 SKAL <sir_kalot@...>
              Il 22/02/2013 11:20, panokaemena@... ha scritto:
              > The pole has a hight of 177m http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_Tower
              >
              >

              I was not talking about the tower itself, but the pole where you
              installed the panohead ... :)

              SKAL



              ------------------------------------
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

              <*> Your email settings:
                  Individual Email | Traditional

              <*> To change settings online go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
                  (Yahoo! ID required)

              <*> To change settings via email:
                  PanoToolsNG-digest@yahoogroups.com
                  PanoToolsNG-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  PanoToolsNG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




              --
              Luca Vascon.
              --
              Questa è la mia mail privata, la guardo di tanto in tanto.
              Se volete parlarmi di lavoro, contattatemi attraverso i siti qui sotto.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.