wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: small versions blurred?
Erik Krause 2005-Jun-30 08:03:00
On 30 Jun 2005 at 6:48, Victor wrote:
> I'll second that. I've bemoaned the fact that I can have a
> wonderfully sharp original image, and it looks great with PTViewer and
> the like, but try as I might I haven't found a way to transfer that
> sharpness into a QTVR using windows. I'm using PanoCube, but if
> there's something better (short of buying a mac) I'd love to hear
> about it.
>
> Victor
>
> --- In #removed#, Fulvio Senore <#removed#> wrote:
> > It happens that, using Windows tools, I have never been able to create a
> > decent small pano. They are always blurred, while the larger ones are
> > sharp. The original images are sharp, so it seems that the file has been
> > blurred in the conversion.
Well, the conversion is done by PTStitcher. Panocube simply assembles
the resulting jpegs and puts a QT header in front of it (or at least
this is what I believe).
> > It seems that you need a Mac to create a good QTVR file...
Not necessarily. There are some (mine hopefully included ;-) that are
made with panocube plus (hence on windows) and that are sharp. I
don't know why there is a difference, perhaps it depends on how the
small version is made. I always downsample in photoshop followed by
another USM sharpening (with low radius of course). Typical size for
my small version is 3000x1500 pixels (compared to 6000x3000 for the
big one). Or is it because I use panocube script quality parameter
100?
best regards
best regards
--
Erik Krause
Ressources, not only for panorama creation:
http://www.erik-krause.de/
Read panotools at GMane:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.graphics.panotools