bradtem wrote:Printing at more than 300 ppi is wasteful, so unless you are covering a wall you are not going to use the resolution of a 5-row in a printout on typical large format printers most of the time.
bradtem wrote:So I would like to see both APG and the viewers move towards the idea of a multi-res pano, where the pano is output as a series of tiles (as krpano likes to display) but not all the tiles are at the same depth and resolution. krpano is already almost there, of course, it would just need to understand that some areas of the pano allow zoom and others do not, and handle the borders.
So in each tile zone, the tiles would be rendered deep enough to show the full resolution in that zone, but no deeper.
If this were possible, many people would shoot panos where they do perhaps even a full sphere with a fish eye, but then do the horizontal row or rows at higher resolution, and further go and shoot the points of interest with even higher resolution, generating a pano that the user can wander through and which appears to be amazing res without being a huge, huge size that takes hours and hours to render.
This is no minor change of course, but I think it's likely to be the way to go for online presentation and virtual tours. Indeed, one might automatically generate tags to go into the viewer that say "here is a place you want to zoom in" so people browsing the pano know what to investigate. It's possible that it might be nice to have an interface where I apply those tags to my long-lens shots of the points of interest, so it's all automatic. (ie. I caption those shots, or can caption them in the layer editor.)
Of course, I also still like to print, so I would need a render mode that lets me render at a printing resolution.
You would need the krpano folks to do this too, but their changes are not too bad, and you seem to be friends.
I should note that step one of this is also quite useful -- which is a rendering mode which outputs tiles rather than (or in addition to) a full image. Or in its complete form, a rendering mode which outputs what krpano's tools do -- a set of tiles, and an xml file with information on them, and a preview. This actually has a number of advantages over the approach of building the whole pano and feeding it to krpanotools. It is much faster and more convenient of course, but also reduces transcoding, and has no size limit issues for very large panos (which run into the limits of jpeg and tiff.) Of course if you do tiles + full pano you still have those issues, but it's still faster and more convenient.
bradtem wrote:I disagree.
bradtem wrote:And my point is, if you generate a panorama for printing, you do not gain anything havng that panorama be at more than 300ppi.
bradtem wrote:DPI is an almost irrelevant number these days.
bradtem wrote:the whole point of gigapixel photography is to produce prints which, unlike traditional photos, can be printed at 200 to 300ppi and thus are tack sharp even if you put your nose up to them, but at the same time are giant. That's what is special about these photos in printed form. People who do giagpixel panos are not interested so much in low-res printing.
bradtem wrote:But today, continuous tone printing (where dots are pixels) such as on the lightjet or a film recorder is rare, and almost all printing these days is halftone, where dots and pixels are very different things.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests