PanoTools mailing list archive
|Date/Time:||22-Oct-2010 14:46:12 +0000|
|Subject:||Re: Re: What's a Gigapixel?|
On 22 Oct 2010, at 15:24, Bernhard Vogl wrote:
> Sorry, i feel urged to answer that:
>> But the projection is irrelevant and YES a 6000 x 3000 images regardless of it's projection or content IS 18 megapixels. Stop trying to make issues where none exist.
> Such type of answer was given to B. Mandelbrot by the established
> science community in response to his fractal theory. And today, the
> first time in history, we are able to describe nature phenomens - by
> using "fractal dimensions" (
> http://www.dichotomistic.com/hierarchies_fractals.html ) :-)
Oh my god, now you want to apply fractal theory to what should be a very simplistic unit of measure.
>> It's the same as a megapixel, these terms are simply units that represent a quantity just like a litre, gallon, mile, kilometre etc.
>> It's like trying to argue how long a mile is based on the type of car and speed I'm driving to cover it.
> Every unit measurement (eg. kg) needs a reference (lies in Paris) and
> method (on Earth). See the coastline example in the above link.
> Same for panoramas.
Um, pixels and x y axis, is anything more needed.
> A user could argue that he is never able to see 18
> megapixels in the viewer.
So, how is this relevant ?
> And a cubic source has another pixel count
> than an equirectangular one - with the same visual result.
> I think, the discussion to find an independent magnitude is very valid
> and interesting.
Yes but ultimately impossible to define and quite pointless