Smooth
Posts: 3729
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Registered: 21 Jul 2004
|
360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 16:59 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:54 GMT
|
|
Note from Moderator: this discussion has been separated from another thread which went off topic
Doug Aurand said: Lets see, single row capture that produces full 360°x 360° coverage
You mean 360°x180°? no such thing as 360x360 unless you buy into the iPix marketing crap.
360 degrees of rotation with +/- 90 degrees tilt from the horizon = 360x180
Don't get me started on the 720° people.....
Regards, Smooth 
www.smooth360.info
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 17:26 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Smooth,
Its only 360°x 180° if you limit your thinking to flat images like an equirectangular projection.
As some one who started with iPIX, I only had spherical iPIX images as output when I started, so I think in terms of a sphere. I always envisioned a full 360° roll up and over the top like Roy Scheider did in Blue Thunder
So when I think of having enough image captured to cover the inside of a sphere, I think of the sphere spinning 360° horizontally, then rolling 360° vertically, so I can envision the continuity of the image on the interior of the sphere.
The earth isn't flat, you know 
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Smooth
Posts: 3729
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Registered: 21 Jul 2004
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 17:40 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Doug,
Mate, the Earth is a sphere so by definition is 360 degrees not 360x360.
When is Earth 360x180? When you photograph it. You don't get an extra 180 degrees just because you look at it upside down. I should know I'm Australian!
Regards, Smooth
www.smooth360.info
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 18:13 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Smooth
Thats correct only if you limit your thinking
The earth is measured (that what we're doing, measuring) in latitudes that are 90° north and 90° south of the equiator, total 180°. And the longitudes are 180° east and west from the prime meridian, total 360°.
So its 360° x 180° in conventional thinking.
But only if you think of a sphere that can only spin on an axis
Or iPIX's old logo, when they were Interactive Pictures, looked like an atom with 2 electrons circling at a 45° angle to verticle, 90° to each others orbit. Those two electrons traveled all the way around the nucleus in the iPIX animated gifs its was a full 360°.
Two orbits of 360° is 360°x 360° to us iPIXers
Its just a more interactive way of thinking, like rolling a marble around in your hand
Open your mind Smooth, feel the Force
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 19:29 GMT
updated: 14 Mar 2011 at 16:13 GMT
|
|
Doug Aurand said: Two orbits of 360° is 360°x 360° to us iPIXers
I have heard of the term "dropped at birth", and I have also heard of ipix.... until now I hadn't made the direct connection.
360x180 is a sphere. Not "conventionally" or "on special offer" or "for personal use only" or "non-ipexers limited brainers special edition"
It's simply reality, and it doesn't matter if it's Smooth or me or anyone else telling you this. The reality does not change.
... unless we take your baby-steps of geometry into the grownup world, and take you seriously.
If you go one merry-go-around in a sphere, starting at the north pole of the sphere, then going in a straight line down to the south pole of the sphere... and once there, you continue to the norhern pole again, but on the exact opposite side of the sphere. In your brain, that makes a sphere 360° x 360° But once you have decided upon this model, you have opened your can of worms, and now it is up to me to have fun  With your 360x360 "sphere" you only covered ONE degree... you better move over to the next degree and explore your 360x360x360 sphere... but you would still only have explored 2 degrees of the total 360°of the sphere... so you would have to go on, and on and on with your ipix thinking, until you cover the whole 360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x
360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°x360°
ipix TRUE sphere.... but it would still be a LIMITED true ipix sphere, because there is also space BETWEEN the one degree markers on a sphere... so your model could be much more complex... but all you have to do, is to stop thinking conventionally, and open your mind to the liberating ipix logic!
You can try to sell this model to G.W.Bush and his family, but... I think most other non-ipixers will dump it.
.... simply because a sphere IS only 360° x 180°, and most human beings over the age of 6 happen to know that to be a fact.
|
|
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 20:06 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Trausti
By your thinking, I can fly all the way around the equator, but can only fly from the South Pole to the North along the prime meridian, but not back to the South Pole along the 180° Longitude, because that would ne a 360° trip?????????
Fortunately I have a broader thinking process and can imagine traveling around the world, a full 360°, winding up where I started, in many directions, not just around the equator. 
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 20:30 GMT
updated: 14 Mar 2011 at 16:13 GMT
|
removed by the moderator
|
Doug Aurand said: Fortunately I have a broader thinking process
It really doesn't matter what you think, or even if you believe that you are thinking (without the brain connected)... a sphere is a sphere is a sphere.
Just because you don't understand the concept of a sphere, doesn't mean it is anything BUT 360° x 180°
You should stop now, before you cause someone laugh so uncontrollably, they might get a seizure.
In the real world, anyone can fly from anywhere to anywhere, in straight or bent lines or with different kinds of patterns... and they'd STILL be traveling on a 360° x 180° sphere.
Just because you don't understand a sphere, doesn't mean that everyone else is the same, and that in turn, does not give you some super-powers that grant you the right to teach people about your ipix logic.
Just stop it already.
|
|
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 20:39 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Trausti
You're partially right
"a sphere is a sphere is a sphere."
If you go all the around a sphere, returning to the point you started at, taking the longest straight path possible, regardless of direction.....you've traveled 360°
Basic US 5th grade geometry
Must be different in Iceland or Peru?
Doug Aurand
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 19 Dec 2009 at 21:10 GMT
updated: 14 Mar 2011 at 16:13 GMT
|
removed by the moderator
|
Doug Aurand said: If you go all the around a sphere, returning to the point you started at, taking the longest straight path possible, regardless of direction.....you've traveled 360°
You are incredible.
Now please, use the rest of the day to figure out what a sphere is.
Speak again when you have discovered that the earth is not flat, and that it is a sphere, and that a sphere is 360° x 180°, and not some imaginary Bushist 360° x 360° ... (Bushist in this sense means "Stupid as stupid can be... and then you add a US president to the mix")
... and you should not try to blame the US educational system for your inability to understand what a sphere is.
|
|
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 1:10 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Trausti
A sphere, the 3 dimensional object, by its definition has the same circumference around no matter the direction its measured around. When you measure all the way around the equator or the poles, its always 360°
If a plane flies all the way around the earth's equator, landing where it took off, it will travel roughly 25,000 miles. If the same plane takes off from Lima, Peru, flies due north to the North Pole, continues straight and due south to the South Pole, then continues straight and due north back to Lima it, again, will travel roughly 25,000 miles. (The earth isn't a perfect sphere, its a little bigger around the equator than around the poles)
A sphere that only measures 360° x 180° is a hemisphere, you know "half a sphere."
You're stuck thinking an Equirectangular Projection, with just 2 dimensions has the same measurements as a sphere which has three dimensions
And the geometry lession is over Trausti, you're dismissed
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
[[i]This post has been edited by the moderator]
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 1:20 GMT
updated: 14 Mar 2011 at 16:13 GMT
|
removed by the moderator
|
Doug Aurand said: Trausti
I'm not sure how George Bush got into this
Dear Doug... I know you don't know... but Bush is the only (still) living person I could trust not to know what a sphere is.
... apart from you of course.
You belong to the religion of 360° x 360° spheres... something that does not exist, even though you think you can explain it to yourself.
For someone who works with panos, it is amazing to see that you don't know what you are working with.
|
|
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 16:16 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Trausti
Are you saying that a sphere doesn't have the same circumference, measured in any direction?
Please tell me, if a sphere is 360°x 180°, what are the measurements of a hemisphere in degrees?
Since you believe I don't know, please educate me on both questions
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 16:50 GMT
updated: 14 Mar 2011 at 16:13 GMT
|
removed by the moderator
|
I am saying that our panoramic spherical images are 360°x 180°.
If you can't grasp that reality, that's your problem.
I've had my laugh at you, and genuinely think the quota for laughing at you is full. So do others.
From now on I will ignore you.
Thank you for the laughs.
Trausti
|
|
|
|
Nick Fan
[NodalNinja]
Posts: 696
Location: Hong Kong
Registered: 26 May 2006
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 16:59 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Doug Aurand said: Trausti
Are you saying that a sphere doesn't have the same circumference, measured in any direction?
Please tell me, if a sphere is 360°x 180°, what are the measurements of a hemisphere in degrees?
Since you believe I don't know, please educate me on both questions
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
Hi Doug,
Think about how to make a multi-row spherical pano. You begin with a row of photos to cover 360 deg horizontally. Then you take many more rows to cover 180 deg vertically. Taking more than 180 deg vertically just repeat the shots.
Alternatively, you can also take a column of photos to cover 360 deg vertically, then take many more columns of photos to cover 180 deg horizontally.
also see this
Unique coordinates
Any spherical coordinate triplet (r, θ, φ) specifies a single point of three-dimensional space.
r ≥ 0
0° ≤ θ ≤ 180° (π rad)
0° ≤ φ < 360° (2π rad)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_coordinate_system
Nick
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Doug Aurand
Posts: 3282
Location: Albuquerque, NM, United States
Registered: 2 Jan 2008
|
Re: 360x360 or 360x180?
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 at 18:59 GMT
updated: 29 Dec 2009 at 20:37 GMT
|
|
Nick
I understand that the multi-row capture method is why many Virtual Photographers think of a full sphere as 360°x 180°
The capture method travels 360° horizontally and at most 90° up and 90° down
But if you ever used a 2 fisheye capture, you envision a sphere like 2 of these;
You can describe a circular fisheye or hemisphere like this as 180° across horizontally and vertically or 360° in circumference with a 180° diameter.
Put two fisheyes/hemispheres that are descrined as 180° horizontal and 180° vertical together to make a complete sphere then it just makes sense to descibe it as 360° around horizontal and 360° around vertical or 360°x 360°
If you put two hemispheres (what iPIXers call these images) descibed as 360° in circumference (around the edge of the circle through the Zenith and Nadir) by 180° in diameter accross the equator, the flat faces of the 2 hemispheres meet and remain 360° and the combined 180° diameters across become 360° around the equator or 360°x 360°
Because the edge of the circular image travels 360° from the Nadir to the Zenith and back to the Nadir, there's no way some one who uses a 2 fisheye capture could think of a sphere as 360° horizontal and 180° vertical.
To us, if you measure all the way around a sphere horizontally, how could you not measure all the way around the sphere vertically to describe it?
Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Prev
