Louis Davidson
Posts: 51
Location: United States
Registered: 24 May 2006
|
Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 11 Feb 2007 at 4:46 GMT
|
|
I have been using Immervision's PureTools. I notice that many of you use PureTools while others use DevalVR. It would be interesting and informative for many of us to understand why some pano photographers choose one system of display versus the other.
Immvervision PureTools vs DevalVR?
Your thoughts of the advantages and disadvantages of each will be meaningful to many in this forum.
Many thanks,
Louis
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
David Marine
Posts: 37
Location: Austin, TX, United States
Registered: 24 Dec 2006
|
Re: Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 11 Feb 2007 at 5:42 GMT
|
|
I bought and used PureTools, but then started noticing I could never get my fullscreen VRs to be as sharp as those of QTVR I saw on the web. So, I bought Pano2QTVR and did a side-by-side and sure enough, the QTVR was noticably sharper with the same source jpeg. I decided sharpness trumped the cool dynamic lens flare and I haven't used PureTools since.
Has anyone else had a similar experience?
- David
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Smooth
Posts: 1468
Location: Australia
Registered: 21 Jul 2004
|
Re: Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 11 Feb 2007 at 6:20 GMT
updated: 11 Feb 2007 at 6:20 GMT
|
|
Immervision Pure Tools = Java
DevalVR = ActiveX (PC Only)
In my mind DevalVR is a far better viewer on PC (albeit without the lens flare gimmick) Using the correct script Apple viewers will get the same panorama delivered in Quicktime.
Sun Java 1.6.0 is a dog. (at least on my PC) 1.5.0 was OK. DevalVR doesn't use Java.
Regards, Smooth 
www.smooth360.com
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
DorinDXN
Posts: 1692
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Registered: 14 Nov 2006
|
Re: Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 11 Feb 2007 at 9:01 GMT
updated: 11 Feb 2007 at 9:06 GMT
|
|
Louis Davidson said: ..
I notice that many of you use PureTools while others use DevalVR. It would be interesting and informative for many of us to understand why some pano photographers choose one system of display versus the other.
Immvervision PureTools vs DevalVR?
Your thoughts of the advantages and disadvantages of each will be meaningful to many in this forum.
Hi Louis,
I must admit I don't like when a pop-up windows tells me that is about to install some activex and tells that is ok if I trust the publisher or so...
But I like DevalVR for the quality and for the local/standalone player also.
The local player you ca scan for the viruses and is much "matterial" than a plugin you know where is on your hardisk and can become your friend faster than those "plugin" stuff
So instead of telling you why DevalVR is good you and other intersted can do a simple test, take only a couple of minutes!
at this link is standalone player
www.devalvr.com/descargas/dps/player.zip
it's a simple player like winamp, media player or so, but much simplier becouse is no need to install and is small, about 248 KB a zip archive (otherwise it will be much bigger... at about a half of one mega or so ) you download and extract it where you like on hdd, and make a short-cut on the desktop if you like.
With that player you can open your equirect image directly or you can open your .mov file or other's panos, even if is on internet,
For exemple istead of browsing to the local .mov file you can enter at file name the address to a .mov file from internet, for example
after conection (or permision to connect to that address if you're behind firewall and permission is needed) you can press the third button in DevalVR player and see that pano in true fullscreen
For the above can working on your system you must be a PC and running at least Windows 98 or superior
Another great benefit of that player is that you can make very simple a CD which if is inserted in CD-drive on a PC with Windows the pano will start directly in fullscreen, that has a great effect if you want to show your work to somebody and even if you produce an .iso, that is a file wich opened in a burning CD/DVD program like Nero or so that cd can remotely produced anyware in the world becouse the .iso file (mean entire CD) is under 5 MB (4 mb pano included for example) and can easelly sended through e-mail, for example.
Dorin
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Louis Davidson
Posts: 51
Location: United States
Registered: 24 May 2006
|
Re: Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 13 Feb 2007 at 0:28 GMT
|
|
Dorin, Smooth & David:
Thank you for your comments. I followed up on Dorin's recommendation to test the DevalVR stand-alone player. When using it, the main difference I see between DevalVR and PureTools is that the panning is much smoother. The sharpness on my screen (1600x1200 @ 96 dpi) was about equal...but again, when panning, DevalVR was far superior.
I played around with the stand-alone DevalVR viewer and discovered that by right clicking the mouse, a box with several options came up. Of course I started testing the options. One was called "Debug Options." Under Debug Options there were two choices: DevalVR Software Engine and DirectX Hardware Acceleration. Frankly, I don't know what they mean or do, but when I changed from the DirectX to the Deval, panning was jerky and not nearly as smooth as before. Then, I changed back to the DirectX and once again panning was smooth as glass. Can anyone explain this to me? Sorry to be so ignorant! 
(By the way, Dorin, I visited Timisoara last August.)
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Aaron Spence
Posts: 71
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Registered: 29 Sep 2005
|
Re: Immervision PureTools vs DevalVR
Posted: 13 Feb 2007 at 2:09 GMT
|
|
Louis,
When you turn off DirectX you are turning off hardware acceleration which is what makes DevelVR such a beautiful viewer.
Aaron.
www.pano.com.au/blog
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
