who needs a gigapixel image?

Discussion forum for techniques and issues relating to the creation of panoramic and/or "mosaic" images

Moderator: spamkiller

who needs a gigapixel image?

Postby nickfan » Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:46 am

I have checked Max's gallery and find out most of his stitched mosaics are less than 100 MP in size. So I wonder if gigapixel image is really necessary/ practical for most photographer. What do you think? Has anyone printed or sold any gigapixel image?

thanks a lot.


Nick
nickfan
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:55 am
Location: Hong Kong

Re: who needs a gigapixel image?

Postby maxlyons » Sun Nov 23, 2008 12:25 pm

nickfan wrote:I have checked Max's gallery and find out most of his stitched mosaics are less than 100 MP in size.


I have put some of my really big images here:

http://www.maxlyons.net

My not-quite-so-big images are here:

http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons

So I wonder if gigapixel image is really necessary/ practical for most photographer.


For most photographers, no....neither practical nor necessary. At least not today. I suspect that in the future, gigapixel images will become a lot more practical (10 years ago, 1 megapixel images were at the high end of consumer-level camera capabilities), but I'm not sure about necessary. I think it all revolves around how one defines necessary, and what one intends to do with the image. I suspect we'll have cameras with a lot higher resolutions than today, flash memory cards measured in terabytes, and so on...

What do you think? Has anyone printed or sold any gigapixel image?


Yes!

Max
maxlyons
 
Posts: 3640
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: who needs a gigapixel image?

Postby joergen geerds » Sun Nov 23, 2008 1:16 pm

I agree with Max, gigapixel are more or less a special field of photography, usually not worth the trouble.

My usual print sizes range from 250 to 780 megapixel (96x30in to 120x72in, 244x76cm to 305x183cm at 300 ppi) at the moment, but some of the larger panoramas were intended as multi-panel installations, and hence I shot them much larger, but most of them time I shoot towards the target resolution.

Past 1 gigapixel is really either for a super large printing project (see the Yosemite extreme panorama project at http://www.xrez.com/yose_proj/Yose_result.html and http://www.hdrlabs.com/news/index.php?i ... 1190947809 disclaimer: I took part in that project) or it turns into an interactive experience only, i.e. what Gerard Maynard did: http://www.yosemite-17-gigapixels.com/
joergen geerds
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:05 pm
Location: New York

Re: who needs a gigapixel image?

Postby nickfan » Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:07 pm

maxlyons wrote:
I have put some of my really big images here:

http://www.maxlyons.net

My not-quite-so-big images are here:

http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons



Hi Max,

Thanks for your reply. I will check out the REALLY BIG ones.

nick
nickfan
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:55 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby Jim Z » Wed Nov 26, 2008 12:53 am

Max,

Thanks for the link. I especially like the Mt Whitney and Alabama Hills pano; it is an outstanding picture! (re. the pano and the gig-pix subject; I remember that pano, but I didn't remember or notice that it is super-high resolution size)

Nick,

I think that there is a necessity for large, high resolution panos. (This isn't from my practice, but from a wish on my part:) I wish that there was a better way to view spherical 360 panos, better than zoomify or the simular apps. If you could view a 360 pano, and zoom and pan with cinema image quality, that would make 360 panos very valuable, I think. And the panos would have to be multi-gigpix resolution, to have the aformentioned image viewing quality. What I mean is; I wish we could pan thru a pano without the image processing artifacts. (Like the difference between interweave and progresive HD video.) Gigapixel panos might not be practical for "most photographer(s)" , but if the seamless, high-quallity image viewing were avalable, gigapixel panos might be profitable for many more professional photographers.
Jim Z
Jim Z
 
Posts: 774
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:16 pm
Location: Tahoma CA

Postby mvejerslev » Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:18 am

Max,

revisiting your large panoramas, I was just wondering how on earth you stitched the sky pictures in this photo http://www.maxlyons.net/wwiimemorial.htm

I assume there are no way of placing control points in these shots (wouldn't even help if there were clouds).

So, how did you do it? any tricks?
mvejerslev
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby maxlyons » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:39 am

mvejerslev wrote:Max,

revisiting your large panoramas, I was just wondering how on earth you stitched the sky pictures in this photo http://www.maxlyons.net/wwiimemorial.htm

I assume there are no way of placing control points in these shots (wouldn't even help if there were clouds).

So, how did you do it? any tricks?


I use two "tricks": The first is that when capturing images with no detail, I always make sure to rotate the camera by exactly the same amount (using the scale on my tripod head). The second, is that I use PTAssembler's "Interpolate" feature (right click on the Step 1 screen) to assign yaw, pitch and roll values for these featureless images. As long as there are images at the end of the row that can be positioned using other images in the project, then this works very well. It can even work if the row only has one end that can be positioned relative to other images in the project.

Max
maxlyons
 
Posts: 3640
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:55 pm
Location: USA

Postby mvejerslev » Fri Jan 16, 2009 2:27 pm

Very instructive, thank you.
mvejerslev
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby pedro silva » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:00 pm

Jim Z wrote:...
I wish that there was a better way to view spherical 360 panos, better than zoomify or the simular apps. If you could view a 360 pano, and zoom and pan with cinema image quality, that would make 360 panos very valuable, I think. And the panos would have to be multi-gigpix resolution, to have the aformentioned image viewing quality. What I mean is; I wish we could pan thru a pano without the image processing artifacts. (Like the difference between interweave and progresive HD video.) Gigapixel panos might not be practical for "most photographer(s)" , but if the seamless, high-quallity image viewing were avalable, gigapixel panos might be profitable for many more professional photographers.


have you looked at krpano? if you want a very large angle of view, you'll have geometric "distortions", which you can use creatively. and if the bandwidth is low, hires tiles may take a while to load. other than that, i find that it works very well. immv, of course...

cheers,
pedro
pedro silva
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:48 pm


Return to Mosaics and Panoramas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest