Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
360x180 on YouTube
|
360x180 on YouTube
Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 12:12 GMT
|
go to thread
|
No doubt this question and its answers have come up on this forumn before but I've not been paying attention, so: Is it possible to post interactive 360x180 panoramas on YouTube. If so how?
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Panoramic of Currituck Beach Lighthouse stairwell
|
Re: Panoramic of Currituck Beach Lighthouse stairwell
Posted: 16 Nov 2011 at 22:12 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Ladad,
A really fantastic panorama and I'm sure very time consuming photoshopping once home but like others I found the bright window pretty jarring, spoiling an otherwise great experience. Well you understood this when you said:
I must admit that I do not like the window! I tried multple renderings but there is a time where enough time was spent and it was time to move on!
But another five or ten minutes simply with select tool and levels would have made all the difference
Of course you would have taken a bit more care than I did
especially when removing the label (probably best left alone in any case) but then I'm just jealous, understandably
Mark 
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multiangle Panoramic Gimbal Bracket- Good?
|
Re: Multiangle Panoramic Gimbal Bracket- Good?
Posted: 5 Sep 2011 at 13:50 GMT
updated: 5 Sep 2011 at 13:52 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Could it be that whever assembled the device and photographed it didn't have a clue? Is it bad design or is there a piece missing?
Or something like it allowing the camera to fit in portrate mode!
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Four Pillars of Empire
|
Re: Four Pillars of Empire
Posted: 29 Jul 2011 at 19:58 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Aliens from Planet Paralax are on their way. Jon, please return post-haste and help defend Empire, Queen Victoria and Country. Kaiserin, Kirch und Kinder. Not to mention Prinz Albert.
Actually I uploaded the wrong image; an unfinished one, sorry! But at least it demonstrates I juudged the angles pretty well whilst rotating my 2.2m pole.
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
The New Acropolis Museum
|
Re: The New Acropolis Museum
Posted: 28 Jul 2011 at 23:35 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Oops - this came up when I clicked on image - don't know why, but thought I'd better post it just incase it's a real threat
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Four Pillars of Empire
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
The Palace of Versailles
|
Re: The Palace of Versailles
Posted: 18 Jul 2011 at 22:58 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Mahmood,
Really enjoyed looking at your Versailles panoramas. Yes if I want to I can find fault, but I don't want to, I simply want to enjoy looking around. I would have been tempted to enhance and sharpen the ceiling paintings, but yours are probably more true to life. And a very pleasing page layout too; eye catching but easy on the eye.
I well remember your early panoramas of the Tall Ships in Stockholm from perhaps three years ago, they were good but these are of a whole different order.
How did you manage the shoot in the palace? Any problems with security or had you authorization?
Anyhow, thanks,
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Turkish Nomads
|
Re: Turkish Nomads
Posted: 1 Jul 2011 at 23:26 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Leon,
Great composition, and not only the nomad scene but lots of your other panoramas too, and nice web site; easilly navigated even though I don't have a word of Turkish, but...
Colour balance and indiferent resolution in many of the panoramas let the pictures down a bit. If they were shot in RAW it might not be too late to improve them. They are certainly worth the effort.
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
OT - Lytro "Light Field Camera"
|
Re: OT - Lytro "Light Field Camera"
Posted: 28 Jun 2011 at 23:17 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Is a clue to how it works in the distinct depth of each clicked 'in focus field'. What I mean is you don't seem to be able to smoothly go in and out of focus in the same way as you could by rotating the focus ring on your camera. Ergo, is the sensor built up of a number of distict layers, each having its own distict focal plane?
How ever it's done, it's certainly impressive. Trouble is I can't think of a serious application except as a gimmick. It certainly could become one of the 'must have' apps for iPhone 5. Almost as important as making telephone calls, something my smart phone (not iPhone) isn't very good at!
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Quaint old thatched cottage
|
Re: Quaint old thatched cottage
Posted: 28 Jun 2011 at 20:02 GMT
updated: 28 Jun 2011 at 20:07 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Yes John, I'd figured out that it's better to under expose by a stop or two in order to get some detail in the sky, it being easier to adjust levels and colour for the rest during conversion from RAW. Unfortunately I didn't get it right when I shot the cottage. It was done in a hurry between showers (weather much like today's here in Hertfordshire as you mention) as I may not get another chance to visit the place,.
Be that as it may, I would appreciate your help regarding
masking, perhaps for slightly bluer skies.
Mark
PS I just mounted the 50cm long print for our friend and it looks good 
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Quaint old thatched cottage
|
Re: Quaint old thatched cottage
Posted: 28 Jun 2011 at 17:33 GMT
updated: 28 Jun 2011 at 17:35 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Dennis, Yup, a pole. and John has it just right at about 2.5m. Despite the camera atop going all over the show, stitching at ground level becomes much easier due to it's greater distance from the camera.
But Deninis, careful what you wish for. "It never rains in Southern California", or so the song says, but if you tempt providence it might well do so. This is what the weather was really like (slight enhancement of plants and roof though, but not the sky) panoradiant.co.uk/Westcountry/Somerset/Cottage_1....
John, It is indeed a lamentable sky. In reality almost no detail whatsoever, just grey with a spike of pixels to the extreme right of the levels curve, None the less I take on board what you say. You are quite right. The lasso tool is dead easy for selecting straightish edges; the roof for instance, but the trees on the skyline is quite another thing. Do you have a tutorial about masking. I really don't know how it works.
Juergen, Thanks for the booster. Glad you liked it, and I will try to iron out those "technical glitches".
Again,
I must say in my own defence, the 40x20 print looks pretty good.
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Quaint old thatched cottage
|
Re: Quaint old thatched cottage
Posted: 28 Jun 2011 at 0:59 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Ouch, I meant to block the magnification so that you wouldn’t notice, Dennis. Some hope, but not HDR, at least not in the conventional sense. Just a bit of clumsy work with the lasso tool to selectively adjust levels. Actually the equirectangular was prepared to make a print for the people who live in the cottage, and the print (2xA4 size) looks fine. (Thats my story and I'm sticking to it. 5th Ammendment kind of thing).
No, Dennis, not handheld. Look again. That just wouldn’t have been possible.
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Quaint old thatched cottage
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Autopano Pro Defaults???
|
Autopano Pro Defaults???
Posted: 16 Jun 2011 at 21:25 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Earlier this month I posted some question about ‘permanently’ resetting defaults in Pano2VR www.panoguide.com/forums/qna/9421/ and got very helpful responses which solved most of my problems. Now I have similar questions concerning Kolor’s AutopanoPro 2.5.
1. I drag and drop my fisheye images into the lefthand pane. So far so good. But in order to assure a 2:1 equirectangular output I must click the spanner symbol ('Group setting') then click ‘Panorama’ and change the ‘Preferred Extend’ from its default ‘Clamp to panorama content’ to ‘Maximum projection range’. After that click ‘Detect’ and the individual images are quickly converted to a partially processed equirectangular image in the righthand pane.
2. In the righthand pane I click ‘Edit’ to get a larger preview image and make whatever adjustments are necessary. Next I click the ‘Render’ symbol, and reset the Width:Height I require. My preference is 6500:3250 pixels. Next I reset the output folder default from ‘..../Desktop’ to the folder I want the rendered image to be saved in. For me this is always the folder the fisheye images came from. Then I click ‘Render’ and a minute or two later, as if by magic, my rendered equirectangular is dropped into the selected folder.
What a wonderful programme BUT  I want to use the defaults I’ve reset for all successive sessions, both those made before closing the programme, closing and restarting and returning much later after the PC is rebooted. And that is what I need your help for please.
Mark
PS And don’t forget although the destination folder will change I always want it to be the same as the folder from which fisheye images came.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Pano2VR defaults?
|
Re: Pano2VR defaults?
Posted: 14 Jun 2011 at 12:20 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thanks everyone for your input. Bob’s is closest to achieving my needs. Having tested his advice and saving as default, he is right about not solving my point 5 – conversion to horizontal cross. Not possible, I suppose. That isn’t saved as a default. However he is only half right about point 1. The default can be saved as Flash but still shows Quicktime in the drop down menu but nonetheless actual conversion is in Flash despite this.
Ranald wrote about droplets, but I’ve not tried this seeing that “Save as default” does most of what I want.
Hans, hope this clears up what you said about the converter. Simple problems that I am sure Thomas at Garden Gnome could put right if braught to his attention because I think many of us, perhaps most, use Pano2VR as first choince.
Mark
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Prev
