Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 3/13/2006
|
Thanks, Phil. Could I ask you to transfer my post about DevalVR from where I replied to you to this forum? Thanks. It will make a good first post.
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 3/14/2006
|
I see it's coming along, Phil. I particularly appreciate the categories down the RHS of what I am seeing--including rotary cameras, swing-lens, QTVR and stitching, etc. Right on target... you've just about covered every aspect.
|
|
|
|
Robert Chin
(K=22282) - Comment Date 5/19/2006
|
Just started doing panorama,what is the correct image size and file size?Iposted a pano using 850 wide but the image is too small to be viewed effeectively in my opinion.See link for the image I am referring to.
Thanks
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1111609
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 5/19/2006
|
Hi, Robert. There is no limit on the pixel dimensions if the ratio of width to height is 2:1 or greater, although of course if you choose widths greater than about 1200 pixels people will have to scroll L&R to see the entire image. The file size limit is 400k, as with all other images. This means that you have to use fairly high JPEG compression. My experience is that for spherical panoramas (360 x 180 degrees, where width is exactly double height) 1,700 x 850 is about as large as you can go without unsightly compression artifacts. Your panorama is very wide and narrow, so it might be possible to get similar quality from an image 2000 pixels wide. Do let me know when you've uploaded a bigger image. By the way, be careful to uncheck the "use sharpening" options when you upload. Any sharpening should be done by you, at full screen resolution, before posting.
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 5/19/2006
|
Hi, Robert. There is no limit on the pixel dimensions if the ratio of width to height is 2:1 or greater, although of course if you choose widths greater than about 1200 pixels people will have to scroll L&R to see the entire image. The file size limit is 400k, as with all other images. This means that you have to use fairly high JPEG compression. My experience is that for spherical panoramas (360 x 180 degrees, where width is exactly double height) 1,700 x 850 is about as large as you can go without unsightly compression artifacts. Your panorama is very wide and narrow, so it might be possible to get similar quality from an image 2000 pixels wide. Do let me know when you've uploaded a bigger image. By the way, be careful to uncheck the "use sharpening" options when you upload. Any sharpening should be done by you, at full screen resolution, before posting.
|
|
|
|
Robert Chin
(K=22282) - Comment Date 5/19/2006
|
Thanks Roger,I appreciate the quick response.
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 5/19/2006
|
Always glad to help a fellow panorama lover!
|
|
|
|
Jinggoy Montenejo
(K=7736) - Comment Date 7/25/2006
|
Hi Roger,
I'm not sure if I uploaded the right image size, I think it met all the requirements, but the final image is still very small. Here are the specs of the image I uploaded :
8648x671
440kb
It's actually a bit more than the requirements, but it still shows up as being a small image at least from my monitor. But the UF server did accept it.
Can you see if I should do any thing differently?
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1151911
Thanks
Jinggoy
|
|
|
|
Robert Chin
(K=22282) - Comment Date 7/25/2006
|
Jinggoy,very nice image but very big and super long.It is very difficult to view,a lot of scrooling.Click on HERE after you open the image for the FULL SIZE VERSION.
Welcome to PANO.
Take care
Robbie
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
(K=86139) - Comment Date 7/25/2006
|
Jinggoy, a splendid panorama. There are no limits on the pixel dimensions, so you were OK there, but I'm surprised you got away with a file of 440kb. The limit is actually supposed to be 400kb, unless it has been increased without informing us. As Robert (in the previous reply) commented, you do need to click on the tab under the smaller image. The latter is put up so that the entire image CAN be seen (however reduced in size). Remember, too, that unless people donate to Usefilm, that is all they will see! (This function alone makes it worth donating to Usefilm IMHO.)
Another point worth noting: when you upload, you will see a little-understood option that gives you a choice of sharpening. I was told that this applies to the reduced-size images created from your original image. With the very great reduction in size that Usefilm has applied to your enormous panorama, it might be worthwhile exploring what difference these settings make. Not that anything will make that wide, shallow image very easy to see without lots of scrolling!
Personally, although I went a bit mad with huge panoramas when this function was first introduced, I found that the high degree of JPEG compression degraded image quality too much (there are compression artifacts on your beautiful panorama, for instance). So you might create a better overall image/impression by using fewer pixels and lower compression to keep within the 400kb file size limit.
|
|
|
|
Doyle D. Chastain
(K=101119) - Comment Date 7/25/2006
|
The Pano was awesome Jinggoy! The thumbnail will never be able to be appreciated by non-donors so you need to consider that critiques by non-donors of Pano shots are virtually worthless. Well done my friend.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
|
|
|
|
Jinggoy Montenejo
(K=7736) - Comment Date 7/26/2006
|
Thanks Roger, I'll upload another Pano soon and will certainly try to downsize the pixel dimension and file size.
Yeah, I think the artifacts were caused by the compression done by UF. I'll have to play around with this one. Thanks for the helpful comments!
|
|
|
|
Jinggoy Montenejo
(K=7736) - Comment Date 7/26/2006
|
Hi Robert! Thanks. Yes, it's super long. The file I made was like 152MB and about 72" long, at least that what PS Elements was telling me.
I had to downsize it to about 30% and reduce the image quality.
What do you mean by click on "HERE" to open the "Full size version"?
|
|
|
|
Jinggoy Montenejo
(K=7736) - Comment Date 7/26/2006
|
Thanks Doyle! Still trying to get more ideas!
|
|
|
|
Robert Chin
(K=22282) - Comment Date 7/26/2006
|
Hi Jinggoy,open link and click HERE,
Robbie
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1151911
|
|
|
|
