wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: Question on Pano shooting
rcrowest 2005-Mar-17 09:56:00
James Lee wrote:
> I have tried to create a
> 180 degrees scenery. I took about 30 over pictures...
>
> The problem is, each photos is around 1MB, as my
> resolution set to 1200 X 1600 in order to get a clear
> pic. So, after creation, it turns out in total, my MOV
> file size is around 20MB...
From my experience of my early panorama attempts, a wide-angle lens
is actually
the most important thing for getting good quality panoramas at a
reasonable file size. It
gives you a good vertical field of view, and also helps by reducing
the number of images
you have to stitch together. For a QTVR of around 200kB, your
stitched image probably
wants to be no more than about 1500-2000 pixels across, or else
you'll have to compress
it so much it'll look awful. My early panoramas (h
ttp://www.horizon.vuurwerk.nl/
crowest2.html) used about 10 landscape-oriented photographs from a
standard 50mm
lens, had no vertical pan and gave disappointing quality when
compressed to about
340kB. I had the same reaction - how do people get such great quality
at small file sizes?
Now, with a fisheye lens, I can get larger panos with a full
floor-to-ceiling pan for only
200kB (http://www.kriv.org.uk/virtual/ivm-qt.html).
I think another factor is choice of subject. When I started I thought
"panoramas - wide
open vistas", but these tend to yield rather disappointing QTVRs
(http://www.kriv.org.uk/
virtual/wn-qt.html) - you need a very high resolution to give enough
detail out to the
horizon, and if you have a narrow vertical field of view you lose the
sense of panning - you
seem to be just scrolling across a flat photograph. The only caveat
is that objects close to
the camera make it very difficult to get a good stitch without a
proper pano head.
I hope this might help - keep stitching!