You are not logged in.

> The forum rules have been updated. Please take a moment to read them.


#1 2013-02-23 08:37:37

magphil
Member
Registered: 2006-06-22
Posts: 97

Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

Voici le Lien.

Ils ne parlent pas du soft utilisé.

Offline

 

#2 2013-02-25 10:44:20

AlexandreJ
Kolor CEO
From: Francin, France
Registered: 2005-11-14
Posts: 7911
Website

Re: Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

autopano giga, bien sur smile

Offline

 

#3 2013-02-26 00:53:30

taf
Moderator
From: Paaaaaaris !
Registered: 2005-12-20
Posts: 2945
Website

Re: Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

Un énorme record pour la team Kolor, car franchement, chapeau pour le soft !!!
Par contre, surement aussi un record du pano le plus moche qui soit, avec un autre record : le plus gros ciel gris du monde ;-)


Look. There's a rhythmic ceremonial ritual coming up !

Offline

 

#4 2013-02-27 14:13:24

magphil
Member
Registered: 2006-06-22
Posts: 97

Re: Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

Il y a encore de problème de collage :

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?vie … atv=5.7381

Offline

 

#5 2013-02-27 15:52:50

gddxb
Member
Registered: 2010-04-27
Posts: 224

Re: Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

Hope you don't mind the switch into English...

There are a number of problems with this one. But the two key ones are as follows:

Firstly, it's not a single panorama - there are 5 images here. One at 27 gigapixels (of which 50% are faked), and 4 larger ones.

Secondly, the 4 larger panoramas (in pixel size) are NOT stitched together. These 4 larger images are 105GP, 93GP, 88GP and 86GP.

There is no world record here. Any claims of such are disingenuous in the extreme.

Offline

 

#6 2013-03-13 17:13:57

gddxb
Member
Registered: 2010-04-27
Posts: 224

Re: Nouveau 320 gigapixels panorama de Londre

In addition to the above, the optical resolution of what is presented is of the order of 40 gigapixels:

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= … amp;type=1

Is anyone who was involved in this prepared to explain what actually went wrong?

I'm not doubting 48,000 images were shot for this.

But there is no evidence presented anywhere that they were actually successfully stitched and rendered at full resolution.

I can't imagine that Canon would be too pleased about the image quality supposedly coming out of one of their >$11K lenses...

Last edited by gddxb (2013-03-13 17:14:13)

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson