|
|
|
Steff
{K:436} 8/21/2004
|
It is all clearer now to me , Roger. Very strange to see the shapes of buildings and light poles change while zooming through your display. I find it hard to focus on something - there is so much information! Fun to zoom around!
... and I agree 3.5 MB is quite big.
Steff
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/21/2004
|
Brad, the picture of me that you get if you search for Roger Williams or go to my portfolio shows the camera on its tripod, and me holding the remote control. Best I can do for now... The file you were waiting for is about 600k. Sorry about that!
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Morris
{K:3307} 8/21/2004
|
Hi Roger, Sorry I lookd too!. Maybe you should post a picture of your new Panorama Toy. might be educational. Interesting image, Still waiting for the main image to download on my earth shattering 128k Line
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/20/2004
|
Ha, ha, HAA! The idea of anyone running anywhere with my camera and tripod is quite funny! I find it hard enough just walking around with them! (There's also the fact that Japan is a pretty law-abiding country...)
|
|
|
|
Matej Maceas
{K:24381} 8/20/2004
|
This is more of a general question than related to this particular image, but I am curious how safe it is to turn your back to the camera for more than a few seconds. Isn't there a risk that you'll count to ten, turn around, and find the camera gone?
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/20/2004
|
Actually, Richard, I am in the picture. One of the two guys standing in front of the pool... I call it my Hitchcock trick. [g]
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/20/2004
|
Hi, Steff. I'm glad you didn't just give up on me! The negative is 6 x 18cm, and I use PanoTools or (in this case) PixMaker to tie the ends together. The rotation of the camera takes place in one sec at 1/125th (top speed), two seconds for 1/60th, four for 1/30th, etc. Light changes during the rotation not because of the time taken but because you go from taking "with" to taking "against" the sun. Overcast days are naturally best! I've upgraded the JPG (JAVA) file to a higher resolution than the one you first saw. Better, I think. Full scan resolution would be a compressed image 3.5MB, which few would want to download! The one there now is about 650K.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/20/2004
|
Yes, Chris, Matsukawa San and I have our backs to the camera. We were counting out loud together so that we would know when we could turn around. I am the one with the photographer's waistcoat thing (useful for filters, lens caps, spare cassettes, etc. if only I could remember which pocket I used for which).
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Thornton
{K:26442} 8/19/2004
|
Oops! I looked. Glad I did, as this we seldom see this kind of panorama and it presents the world in yet another aspect. I suppose you have to spend some time setting up and leveling the camera. Do you walk around the tripod, avaoiding being in the picture?
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Garland
{K:27077} 8/19/2004
|
Hi Roger; certainly an unusual take here-- in a technical sense. It sort of messes with the mind. I think it's because we're not usually able to see this wide an angle of view-- at least with this kind of clarity. A panorama on steroids-- but I like it. You've presented something we can't usually see and the subject is interesting too.
Thanks for your comments on tonight's seascapes. Actually to get the near shore surf even as white as it is took some PSP work and I was concerned about overdoing it. Cheers. Craig
|
|
|
|
|
Steff
{K:436} 8/19/2004
|
Hi Roger - its me again.
I'm interested what format the actual 360 degree neg is and how long it takes to make the full exposure. I imagine it would be a problem under patchy sky with light conditions changing during the exposure. And how do you stitch the ends together?
I'm very interested in seeing the full quality Java presentation.
Steff
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Spracklen
{K:32552} 8/19/2004
|
Fabulous, Roger!! I just went and looked at the biggee ~ wow!!
Are you the guy under the tree in the left centre?!
Presumably one of the prerequisites with these shots is that the camera is sat on a tripod on a perfectly horizontal plane?
Anyway, I just love these 'in the round' shots ~ keep 'em coming!
Best regards, Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/19/2004
|
Hmmm. Well, the original is medium format, so the quality IS rather good, though I say it myself. I was trying to see if I could produce something that would still have the VR capability you really need to look into this kind of panorama while (just) slipping under Altaf's 300k file size limit (this one is about 270k). Guess the answer is "no!" Thanks for the feedback--much appreciated!!
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/19/2004
|
Oh dear! That bad?
|
|
|
|
|
Steff
{K:436} 8/19/2004
|
Hi Roger,
I think the quality loss in the Java presentation makes it just a toy to play around with - not really suited to show off your abilities as a photographer.
Dont get me wrong.....it is fun - just hurts my eyes. I'm sure the actual image is top quality.
Steff
|
|
|
|
|
Steff
{K:436} 8/19/2004
|
ooops sorry I looked
|
|
0 
