Image-stitching and virtual tour solutions My account Updates
It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:29 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:37 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:51 pm
Posts: 71
Voici le Lien.

Ils ne parlent pas du soft utilisé.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:44 am 
Offline
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:56 pm
Posts: 5865
Location: Francin, France
autopano giga, bien sur :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:53 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 2675
Location: Paaaaaaris !
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 !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:13 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:51 pm
Posts: 71
Il y a encore de problème de collage :

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.9681&view.vlookat=5.7381&view.fov=6.1855&imarkerath=-96.9681&imarkeratv=5.7381


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:52 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:07 am
Posts: 219
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:13 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:07 am
Posts: 219
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=a.10151565323466412.1073741825.602476411&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 on Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group