wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: Fisheye vs. Rectilinear High Resolution follow up
Robert C. Fisher 2005-Jun-25 17:40:00
The issue is resolution. I have found that the panos I shoot and post
at native resolution (pixel for pixel no reduction in the stitched
image) have more resolution and detail even after I reduce them to
smaller sizes for the web. I have tested this many times over the past
5 years of shooting panos. The higher res the original and the longer
you can keep that resolution the better the detail and resolution of
the finnished pano. Oh yes and I also want to keep that resolution for
making prints, which I need to do again, painfully behind with my
printing and website.
I don't think this had anything to do with the project, WWP, but it was
a technical question that Tom had.
And wellcom to the group Scott. I hoped you participated in the shoot
and will post your bio and experiences so we all have a little insight
into your panos.
On Jun 25, 2005, at 8:49 AM, espressotamper wrote:
> Robert & Tom,
> I use the 10.5mm and am very happy with it. Are these high resolution
> panos -
>
> "16K px by 8K px. The panos I shoot with my 10.5mm are 8450 x 4225px."
>
> for printing? I'm sure that must be the point of that size. Almost all
> of my pano delivery is
> on the web so it must load quickly and I rarely require anything over
> 1200x600 unless it is
> a full screen. Having not printed panos in a large format yet, could
> you provide a very brief
> description of the file size and print size you like. So that I am not
> off topic, describe what
> you would do to use a high resolution pano about water : )
>
> Thanks,
> Scott Stillman
> http://www.vrdigital.com/
>
> P.S. Hello to everybody! I think this my very first post after being a
> member of the group
> for months. What took so long for me to post? I really enjoy the group.
>
Cheers
Robert C. Fisher
QTVR Photography/Cinematography
www.rcfisher.com