Maybe so, but then you have to accept the fact that a normal gigapixel
panoramic is going to be a heckuva lot sharper than a spherical gigapixel
panorama, unless you wanna compare 6 cubefaces.
How about instead of trying to create records, people create photos that
people like viewing....
Heck even 40mp will fill most of a wall...
It'd be nice that people would stop wasting time stitching and try waking up
earlier to catch the light or camp a scene out for whenever it comes and
then stitch a moderately high resolution image that then makes magic or what
some people call photography.
If a gigapixel scene takes 45 minutes to shoot, you're trying to shoehorn in
a whole slew of images that don't match in lighting.
Now, until we have easy access to caves or imaxs for viewing full resolution
photos, I might care a little more.
I'm not even sure their projectors are up to the task.
.end rant
If a gigapixel photo was created in a forest and if no one cared was it
really taken?
s
-----Original Message-----
From: #removed# [mailto:#removed#] On
Behalf Of Matthew Rogers
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 6:27 PM
To: #removed#
Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] What's a Gigapixel?
No it simply is not, a 6mp camera like the D70 has images which are 3000px x
2000px or 6 million pixels hence 6 megapixels. You can look at it anyway you
want but a gigapixel image has to be 1,000,000,000 pixels regardless of the
projection, crop etc. If the final image doesn't have a billion pixels then
it aint a gigapixel image.
I do love how panoramic photographers seem to be addicted to making things
more convoluted and more difficult then necessary.
Matt
Next message:
Previous message: