proj-imim:
Re: Site closed, and changes
Julie McDonald 2001-Jun-05 22:37:45
I certainly see no problem in using 3 full-framed fisheye (160 degree)images
if this gets round the iPix problem but I would prefer to see iPix stopped.
What are the implications for Nikon in all this this ? It seems to me they
would be badly hit by reduced sales for thier fisheye lens + Coolpix Camera
or are they together with iPix
regards
Julie McDonald
----- Original Message -----
From: van der Lande JP <#removed#>
To: 'Thorsten Witzek' <#removed#>
Cc: <#removed#>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 3:52 PM
Subject: RE: Site closed, and changes
> Hi Thorsten
>
> The _fix_ proposed by Helmut would still allow us to use 3 full-framed
> fisheye (160 degree)images to produce 360*180. If this can get the bad
guys
> off our back, it sounds like good news.
>
> This might not provide much consolation for those among us that prefered
> producing panos with 2 frames. Nevertheless, let's consider the improved
> image quality _bonus_ obtained by the 3 frames method.
>
> Not to mention the promised new features in Helmut's future work: "Inside
> PTEditor (next version) you can interactively adjust yaw/pitch/roll/hfov
of
> each source image, ie all geometry related parameters. I will probably
also
> implement a brightness/contrast dial. All other editing stuff should be
done
> in Photoshop (edit and reload in PTEditor. Seam positions are controlled
via
> alpha mask, which may also be edited in parallel in any graphics
program.".
> I can't wait to see that, eventhought I appreciate that with the latest
> development on the patent front, this great work will be delayed somewhat.
>
> I profit of this occasion to thank you, as well as all the other listers,
> for the great tips, advices and help provided through the list.
>
> Best regards,
>
> JP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: #removed#
> [mailto:#removed#]On Behalf Of Thorsten Witzek
> Sent: lundi 4 juin 2001 22:11
> To: Helmut Dersch
> Subject: AW: Site closed, and changes
>
>
> Hello!
>
> > Joost Nieuwenhuijse schrieb:
> > >
> > > It's not allowed to use a 'substantial part' of a patent
> > either, to prevent
> > > people from splitting an invention into two parts and distribute them
> > > separately. This can still be seen as infringement.
> > >
> >
> > This may apply for cases where the two parts make no sense
> > separately, and where the two parts are novel ideas each on
> > its own. This is not the case here, where each part can be used
> > separately, and each part existed long before ipix.
> >
> > Anyway, this is no longer possible after removing 180 degree
> > processing from the program, so even this remote danger
> > will no longer exist.
>
> And why will you remove it although? PhotoVista have done it before, and
now
> you, too? Why do everyone draw in the tail so fast and leave the users
> alone? I don't understand it.
>
> Thorsten Witzek
>
>