gkaefer wrote:

under autopano wiki-> Resources
http://www.autopano.net/wiki-en/action/view/Main_Page
I added a table with the gigapixel pano records...

direct link: http://www.autopano.net/wiki-en/action/ … el_Records

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

There is a mistake in your table: Vienna 50 Gigapixel is online since 21st of July.
and Rio is online since 23 of JULY- not June

Last edited by julian kalmar (2010-07-25 08:46:24)

julian kalmar wrote:

gkaefer wrote:

under autopano wiki-> Resources
http://www.autopano.net/wiki-en/action/view/Main_Page
I added a table with the gigapixel pano records...

direct link: http://www.autopano.net/wiki-en/action/ … el_Records

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

There is a mistake in your table: Vienna 50 Gigapixel is online since 21st of July.
and Rio is online since 23 of JULY- not June

I stand corrected.

You might want to go and edit the Wikipedia page to reflect this

;-)))
thanks for all replies.

I dont want to play court... so I add all panos I know to the list according the stated Gigapixel achieved.
If listed I add creation and going online date. So if or if not one pano hold the record for 5 seconds or not .... does not finally care...
(and if you compare the dates you can see that vienna pano never hold the record ;-( )

Finally interesting is to compare date and size and get the feeling for the fact thats absolute nonsense to hunt for the record, when within 6 months the size is more than doubling... ;-)

everybody can add items to the list, thats the reason I've choosen the wiki and not the forum itself...
just on top right side create your own account and just press edit ;-)

I'll try to catch up all listed panos and to correct/add the wiki table...

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

I added some panos (Delft, Bruce Canyon and Pague)
and I also added to special cases:

the terapixel project (Astronomiical pano where images are taken since 50 years... - so biggest possible timelapse pano ;-)
also some additional infos about terapixel project: http://www.physorg.com/news198754211.html

I added "Torrey Pines City Beach" - not really a pano per definition - but its a single film/analog image with 4 gigapixel

and finally I added the index page of Julian Kahlmas Gigapixel panos because its showing some records like worlds first fullsperical gigapixel pano or the biggest (6 gigapixel)pano using focus stacking and bracketing

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

In case you don't have Silverlight installed, you may have a look at the making of panorama here http://www.360cities.net/image/budapest … th-lookout

Can someone explain to me what the difference is between the "Total pixels" and the "estimated optical pixels"?

on gigapans site of the Shanghai Pano its is said...:

Total pixels: 272.31 G
Horizontal viewing angle: 175 degree
Vertical viewing angle: 65 degree (+5 degree to -60 degree)
Total shots: 12,000 (150 columns and 80 rows)
Lens: Canon 400mm F5.6 and 2X tele-converter
Camera: Canon 7D (18M pixels per image)
Estimated overlap: 28% (set to 25%)
Average time per image: 2.4s
Estimated optical pixels: 112G pixels

source: http://gigapan.org/gigapans/66626/

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

Last edited by gkaefer (2011-01-28 12:49:31)

upload try #25

750 x 500 pixels
1440 Kb uncompressed .tif
280 Kb .jpg

Whoops, I've been trying to upload the CMYK version  ---   DUH! 

RP

Last edited by Apapane (2011-01-30 21:13:26)

what I dont understand is why all this calculations at all.
total pixels  - X images multiplied with y pixels per image
but the pixels of the pano dont need to be calculated manually, After rendering with APG the pixels of the final image is displayed... or not?

and in case of using Merlin: the images are not absolutley 100% equal taken. theres a difference some more or less. so even if I say I want 20% overlap its never exactly 20% overlap for each image...

Liebe Grusse,
Georg

Last edited by gkaefer (2011-02-01 01:51:19)

Richard,

before starting with the pano you've source images with x megapixel, each image should have the same dimensions so exact the same pixel in total.
this number is finally for the resulting pano not meaningful. clear...

and before doing your pano your formula calculates you an estimated number of resulting pixel. also clear...

but what I dont understand is why having an estimated number of pixel when the pano is finished?
each software can exactly say you the width and height pixel of you image. And Autopano does this also before you start rendering the pano

so why all this effort of listing an estimated number of pixel? each final pano has an exact number of pixels. why not listing this number?

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

Last edited by gkaefer (2011-02-01 09:27:54)

Hi Richard -

Just going to chip in with a couple of points here.

I'd certainly agree with GURL regarding a starting point for calculating the "true" number of pixels.

If you know the focal length used, sensor size, and pixel density of the sensor, then it's a relatively trivial matter to work out the effective number of pixels for a given field of view of the resulting panorama. You don't have to worry about number of individual photos and overlap percentages at all.

However, I believe (and I don't profess to be an expert on this) this result would be for a spherical projection. If you flatten the panorama, then you're going to introduce interpolated pixels as you move out from the panorama center.

The issue is, how many.

I suspect there's some maths that could be used here, but to be honest, I don't really have the inclination to work it all out.

One thing that I can comment on though, is that if your panorama isn't close to being centered on the center of the image, then AutoPano can wildly inflate the size of it. I've taken panoramas of the Burj Khalifa (similar to this one - http://gigapan.org/gigapans/65156/ ) of just a few hundred images that AutoPano told me would result in a >200GP image.

Obviously in that example, the vast majority of the image is above the center point of the panorama (I'm referring to the center point as where the sensor plane is vertical). In the Shanghai example, I'd guess something like 80% of the image is below the horizontal.

I've not witnessed other programs (PTGui, ICE & one more I can't remember the name of at the moment) doing this. It is something peculiar to AutoPano.

Regards,

Gerald.

Apapane wrote:

gkaefer wrote:

Richard,

before starting with the pano you've source images with x megapixel, each image should have the same dimensions so exact the same pixel in total.
this number is finally for the resulting pano not meaningful. clear...

and before doing your pano your formula calculates you an estimated number of resulting pixel. also clear...

but what I dont understand is why having an estimated number of pixel when the pano is finished?
each software can exactly say you the width and height pixel of you image. And Autopano does this also before you start rendering the pano

so why all this effort of listing an estimated number of pixel? each final pano has an exact number of pixels. why not listing this number?

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

Georg,
Your question from earlier in this thread:

Can someone explain to me what the difference is between the "Total pixels" and the "estimated optical pixels"?

In order to understand the difference between "total" and "estimated" pixels, one must first define them.  I showed how "estimated optical pixels" may be derived from a given set of images with known overlap. 

What is more curious to me is: How does a stitched pano (in this case, a gigapixel panorama) end up with more pixels rendered than the maximum possible "optical" pixels (frames x Mpixels per frame)?  To me, it suggests that there is distortion due to the projection of the stitched images (I probably missed a thread about this), or there is some mis-calculation by the stitching program.  Any other ideas?

Richard

Guillaume Roumestan wrote:

Hello,

I would like to present you some of my gigapixels which could be listed in your page : www.gigapixeltour.com

Let me know about it.

Happy new year everybody!!!

welcome
its a wiki, so take an account (login top rigth and than choose an id, fill in email and choose a password - than you can edit the wiki page and add your panos. As I can see the Cannes 65gigPano is listed since July...
... of course I can do it too..

I added your site in the listing on the bottom...

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

Last edited by gkaefer (2012-01-05 12:01:27)