Forum:
Panoguide Announce
Thread:
Changes to Panoguide
|
Re: Changes to Panoguide
Posted: 28 Feb 2011 at 16:25 GMT
updated: 28 Feb 2011 at 16:33 GMT
|
go to thread
|
mediavets said: I can tell you that every decision we make is in the interest of progress, and that we sincerely want to provide you with the best resources possible. I've worked in marketing and I wish to congratulate you on a perfect example of marketing-speak weasel words.
Andrew
Maybe they'll get rid of Immervision viewer and use a viewer that makes the gallery worth going to.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
STS-134: close-up panos before last flight of Discovery
|
Re: STS-134: close-up panos before last flight of Discovery
Posted: 22 Feb 2011 at 12:17 GMT
|
go to thread
|
...and they had to use that god-awful ImmerVision PURE Player for Java 1.9.0.0.
Geeze -- they are going to give Java a bad name.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 21 Feb 2011 at 19:47 GMT
|
go to thread
|
The reason I mention it is because once upon a time, I wrote some 3D visualization programs using buffer switching and synchronized glasses.
The impression of 3D would never work until the viewpoint vectors converged rather closely. When the viewpoint vectors converged at infinity (parallel, straight ahead) the impression of 3D was just not there. It was just a vibrating image.
I don't know this applies to 3D panos.....
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 21 Feb 2011 at 19:08 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
Have you tried setting the point of convergence to 10-20 feet?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 21 Feb 2011 at 17:05 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
Smooth, are your camera's optical axises parallel. Do they converge at infinity?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 at 18:14 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
Maybe the point of convergence should be about 3 meters or somewhere around there?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 at 7:10 GMT
|
go to thread
|
ummmm....that is not a full sphere. What there is of the nadir has spots that are perceived in 3D and spots that are out of alignment and are not perceived in 3D (by my visual cortex).
And the sky is really nothing there. The center -- as in a cylindrical 3D cross eyed pano -- looks ok.
But in general, I hate anaglyphs because they are always so dark after being filtered by red/blue glasses. Make them brighter.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Multi-row 3D pano?
|
Re: Multi-row 3D pano?
Posted: 19 Feb 2011 at 21:24 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Is a spherical 3D pano even possible? Wouldn't the nadir and zenith be -- no other word -- weird?
I can see cylindrical 3D panos being technically possible -- with some effort. But not spherical....
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Tokina 10-17mm
|
Re: Tokina 10-17mm
Posted: 18 Feb 2011 at 17:16 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
Just wondering -- is it too complicated to try a fix on your own. I know it's a lens and I'd be afraid but just wondering.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
HTML5 pushed back until 2014
|
Re: HTML5 pushed back until 2014
Posted: 16 Feb 2011 at 17:19 GMT
updated: 16 Feb 2011 at 17:20 GMT
|
go to thread
|
I sat on a standards committee once -- they are simply boondoggles for the members. A way to get their companies to pay for vacations. One of the meetings I went to was in New Orleans just before Mardi Gras. We stayed in the Latin Quarter right on Bourbon St. Fun!
So naturally, the longer the development of the standard takes, the more great vacations the members of the standards committee will get.
Do the math....
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Nadir shot
|
Re: Nadir shot
Posted: 15 Feb 2011 at 5:03 GMT
updated: 15 Feb 2011 at 5:04 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
I put the monopod on my shoulder and hold it out perpendicular to my body with the camera pointing as it points on the middle row -- straight ahead except now it's pointing straight down The camera is about eye level -- the same as when I shoot the rest. I eyeball the position on the ground. Works good enough outdoors.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
|
Re: Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
Posted: 13 Feb 2011 at 18:50 GMT
updated: 13 Feb 2011 at 18:57 GMT
|
go to thread
|
FC-E9 consideration, really?
Regards, Smooth
Let me be Devils advocate -- the lens is not a bad lens. It's just incompatible with the optics in modern compact cameras -- apparently. If you look at panos done with the Nikon 8X00 series compact, the results were pretty good -- for 2004.
It's just that modern DSLR's and EVIL's and fisheyes are so much better that the FC-E9 looks bad by comparison.
If it was possible to find a camera with compatible optics, that would be interesting. But probably not going to happen. It might be worth taking a look at pairing the old Nikon 8400 with the FC-E9 and see if that could work. A full kit would only be $400-$500. Might be a little heavy.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
|
Re: Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
Posted: 12 Feb 2011 at 22:45 GMT
|
go to thread
|
DennisS said: It's the roll off and CA at the edges that screw things up. That raises a good point. I remember the edges being so horrible. That lens is touted as a 2 shot solution, but the seams are a mess.
Maybe it will work for a 4 around 7.5 up tilt? That may remove enough of the edges and provide a decent panorama. I just wish I had a current model Coolpix camera so I can test it. I have the lens and so very many adapter tubes.
Even 6 around with a lot of cropping doesn't really help the softness at the edges. The center is great but the image deteriorates fast toward the edges.
I looked at some images (cropped) taken with a Nikon 8700 and FC-e9 and they looked a lot better at the edges. I'm waiting for the image set to be sent to me. I'll post if interesting.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
|
Re: Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
Posted: 12 Feb 2011 at 18:42 GMT
|
go to thread
|
It may be that the FC-e9 will produce acceptable images only if it is on a compatible Nikon like the 8400/8700/8800.
The lens is a good lens. It's really sharp in the center. It's the roll off and CA at the edges that screw things up. And I think that's because the built in lens of my LX3 (for example) is just not optically compatible with the FC-e9 optics.
I'm wondering if any of the newer P series Nikon compacts would be optically compatible with the FC-e9.
The thought is bouncing around in my head to get an old Nikon 8400 and play with that.
Thoughts anyone?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Compact camera/lens for lightweight travel
|
|
Prev
