Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Virtual Tour Analytics
|
Re: Virtual Tour Analytics
Posted: 15 Jan 2012 at 23:38 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Dorin
Will it be possible to insert it into the .html code of a tour like Tourweaver makes?
Like the code for Google Analytics is inserted into webpages?
Doug
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Virtual Tour Analytics
|
Re: Virtual Tour Analytics
Posted: 15 Jan 2012 at 21:11 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Hans
There's no entry to www.vabq.com except directly to each virtual tour like
TourWeaver_ThePit.html" title="http://www.vabq.com/GoLobos/TourWeaver_ThePit.html">www.vabq.com/GoLobos/TourWeaver_ThePit.html
All my tours are created with Tourweaver which only has one HTML file that's part of the tour.
So there's only one html page for each visitor to access each visit
According to what you're saying and Mach 5 says, none of the tours should have any length of time to report...at all
Please explain....
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Virtual Tour Analytics
|
Re: Virtual Tour Analytics
Posted: 15 Jan 2012 at 15:41 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Hans Nyberg said: So you really believe in this.
Please Doug take a look at the timings and what the files are.
10 minutes for a zip file which is actually a1.4kb jpg
Or a bin file is 12 minutes.
This timings has nothing to do with real viewer time used.
Hans
I take some of the numbers with a big grain of salt, especially those with few sessions and really long view time, figuring someone openined the tour in a new Window or Tab, went on to another Window/Tab and forgot the tour Window/Tab, racking up a long time the session was open, but no one was looking at it.
But the tours like The Pit and the ABQConvCtr seem very reasonable to me
Its not a perfect solution, but its better than nothing
Just the number of hits on the .html file for each tour (not shown) are very useful for my customers to determine the value of their tour.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Virtual Tour Analytics
|
Re: Virtual Tour Analytics
Posted: 15 Jan 2012 at 15:33 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Smooth said: and you thought "Galleries" was the best option in the forum to place it?
Sorry, I has just posted the same to Hi ,new samples of tourweaver7 and didn't pay attention to which forum I was in
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Virtual Tour Analytics
|
Virtual Tour Analytics
Posted: 14 Jan 2012 at 19:17 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Though this might be a good subject for a new thread, not just keeping the Tourweaver 7 thread where it was brought up going
SteveOhOhio asked about a way to determine the length of time a virtual tour is viewed.
My log file analytics program can produce this report based on Sessions rather than .html pages viewed
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 14 Jan 2012 at 19:12 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Neil
As a guess, I would think either image was shot with a monopod between the couple that was edited out
Could have been a boom too
Did you try to contact the photographers?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 14 Jan 2012 at 18:51 GMT
|
go to thread
|
neil
@Doug- some of your example panoramas, were they just photos or was I unable to pan them? Because they were in flash player so got doubt? Still the image quality is excellent. Was curious about the stadium example, how do you avoid the shadows with such huge floodlights overhead? Any special technique there?
Most real estate virtual tours in the US are a combination of Still Photos and 360° Images. The 360s are the "main" rooms of the house, the Stills show less significant rooms or small rooms that are difficult to place the camera & tripod like 2nd & 3rd bedroom. Also the stills are used to show details that the 360 can't show as well
As far as the flood lights in the arena, they are placed so they won't cause dark shadows when the players are on the court, so I didn't have any shadows either
@Everyone- Do you guys generally use external lights or shoot with the ambient lighting? If you use some strobes how do you eliminate them in the final panorama?
Very few of us use flashes of any kind because of the shadows they throw.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Hi ,new samples of tourweaver7
|
Re: Hi ,new samples of tourweaver7
Posted: 14 Jan 2012 at 18:03 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Steve
Here is what my Log File Analyzer can do
It provides the length of Session Time, but it doesn't match the number of times the tour .html file is viewed
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Panoramas from Thailand
|
Re: Panoramas from Thailand
Posted: 14 Jan 2012 at 15:45 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
If you reduce the Saturation in Photomatix or whatever HDR/Tone Mapping program you're using, you'll get more natural looking colors
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 13 Jan 2012 at 23:45 GMT
updated: 13 Jan 2012 at 23:47 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Depends on what you consider a modern screen
This link to Web Analytics that Hans posted a few weeks ago show that the majority of screens being used are about 20" or less
gs.statcounter.com/#resolution-na-daily-20101101-...
My Google Analytics shows the same thing.
The computer I do my photo and tour work is 1280x1024, falling right in the middle of the mosted used screen size in the report, and full screen looks fine.
To be honest, when I demostrating my work to Realtors and often home owners when I shooting their homes, I have them find the sample tour themsleves and have seen very few click the Full Screen button unless I suggest it
The iPIX Viewer doesn't have a Full Screen function, so for a while I was making two versions of each image on VirtualAlbuquerque. The larger "Super-Size" images got viewed about 1/10 as many times as the "Standard" size
So I don't see a reason to size my images for a viewing size that isn't the primary viewing size peopple use.
If you're observing different activity by the people who are viewing your work, I can understand why you might want to make the images larger
Later
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 13 Jan 2012 at 20:35 GMT
|
go to thread
|
My Realtor customers and their customers, the home sellers, are all happy with it.
Just got a nice compliment from the seller of a small ranch south of Albuquerque through the Realtor who hired me.
Thought his ranch looked "fantastic"
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 13 Jan 2012 at 15:04 GMT
|
go to thread
|
NeilPatel said: What are the typical final resolutions of your panos? And what maybe the result I get with my 15mp using Sigma 4.5mm? What resolution is good enough for web viewing? How challenging is it to shoot with Sigma 8mm with crowd? Generally how quickly do the pros like you here click one pano?
Final resolution is very much a matter of personal opinion.
Like John H says, you'd get between 5000x2500 to 6000x3000 with the Sigma 4.5mm on a 15mm sensor.
These links are real estate tours I did recently, the images are 3000x1500 at 75% Quality
vabq.com/10CalleArbolito/TourWeaver_10CalleArbolito.html
vabq.com/6504CalleCandelaNW/TourWeaver_6504CalleCandelaNW.html
The images in the tour of the Pit (Basketball Arena) are 3500x1750 at 80%.
vabq.com/GoLobos/TourWeaver_ThePit.html
You can decide for yourelf if they have enough resolution for web viewing
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 13 Jan 2012 at 4:22 GMT
updated: 13 Jan 2012 at 4:23 GMT
|
go to thread
|
With his Canon, he'll need to tilt 7.5° to close the Zenith because part of the top of the curve is cut off with the smaller sensor
I've just gotten better stitches with a Zenith shot pulling the top of the image together with my Sigma 8mm on an XTi
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
|
Re: Is Sigma 8-16 good enough
Posted: 12 Jan 2012 at 21:15 GMT
updated: 12 Jan 2012 at 21:16 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Something like a Sigma 8mm fisheye would cut your number of shots down to 4H+Z+N, four horizontal, a Zenith straight up shot and a Nadir straight down shot, 5 shots total
If you're suggesting shooting panoramas of weddings, the people moving around will be a problem that fewer shots will help reduce
A guy in Brazil is shooting panoramas of weddings in progress and chose a lens that could capture everything in 3 shots: the Sigma 8mm on a camera with a full frame sensor. For your cropped sensor you'd need a Sigma 4.5mm or a Sunex 5.6mm to do just 3 shots. But you'll give up a lot of resolution compared to the Sigma 8mm on your camera
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Basketball Arenas
|
Re: Basketball Arenas
Posted: 12 Jan 2012 at 0:22 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thanx Bob
Here's the virtual tour that was shot at the same time as that photo
vabq.com/GoLobos/TourWeaver_ThePit.html
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Prev
