Sometime around 2/9/07 (at 10:02 +0000) wardnet2001 said:

>Incidentally I found this link which has some info about download
>costs of data on mobile devices.
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/mobile/bbc_news/newsaudio/cost/index.shtml
>I only mobile surf on free wifi, but this illustrates another issue.

It certainly does. And the 'Pay As You Go' (PAYG)
charge that mentions is actually pretty much the
standard charge that almost *all* mobile users
(in the UK) will pay unless they have a specific
data charge plan. PAYG in this instance refers to
the data traffic, not the overall call charge
contract.

This means that standard tariffs can cost users
as much as a penny per kilobyte for data
transfer, or £1 for around 100KB, or around ten
pounds sterling for a megabyte.

For these people, you'd better make sure your panos are worth the cost! :-)

Internet plans that provide much, much better
deals are being pushed hard now. I've been using
a contract that charges £7.50 per month for up to
3GB of data transfer per month. (Rather more
affordable than the £30 I was charged last summer
for checking news reports on my mobile while
working at a festival one weekend.)
I used to seek out free wifi zones, but now I
don't worry about it. Imagine trying to max out
3GB per month on a mobile phone! ;-)

But on my WM5 mobile (rot its soul, where's the
UK iPhone?), Immervision's mobile player only
works with local content, not online stuff.

Peter, are you saying you have the non-mobile,
standard version of Immervision's player working
on your WM6 phone?

k

Keith Martin wrote:
> where's the UK iPhone?

don't hold your breath - it currently does not play VR.

Yuv

Great article.  I had not seen it before.  It looks like Panorama
Factory might be my best choice for stitching very large multi-row
panos, although if Hugin also supports > 3G and takes advantage of
multiple processors on Linux, I may have to create a dual boot system
and give it a try.  I don't look forward to spending a lot of time
figuring out how to install and configure Linux though.  I wonder if
it is it worth it.

>
> It's WAY overkill for use with CS3.  Read this
http://tinyurl.com/ysft7u
> for the HOWs and WHYs of why CS3 can only address 3GB RAM.
>
> Darn it.
>

Sometime around 2/9/07 (at 10:21 -0400) Yuval Levy said:

>Keith Martin wrote:
>>  where's the UK iPhone?
>
>don't hold your breath - it currently does not play VR.

Yes, very frustrating. But while the phone I have now can play VRs in
a large 640x480 screen - it is really not much good at all as a
phone! :-) I might just relegate it to being a pocket VR demo machine
if I got (or rather when I get) an iPhone.

(Although VR support in some way in the iPhone would be absolutely
wonderful. Of course.)

k

Don French wrote:
> I don't look forward to spending a lot of time
> figuring out how to install and configure Linux though.  I wonder if
> it is it worth it.

a release of the current hugin for windows is in the pipeline. if you
can wait a few weeks, you don't need linux.

that said, with ubuntu it is a breeze. there is not much to configure
other than run the gui installer from the CD.

hugin is part of the distribution, so also here not much to configure.
the simplest way to get it is to start a terminal window and type the
following three lines ($ is the command line prompt, type only what is
behind that):

$ sudo apt-get install libpano
$ sudo apt-get install enblend
$ sudo apt-get install hugin

the first line gets you the panotools library.
the second line gest you enblend.
the third one installs hugin and you should see it right in your menu.

even installing and compiling from source is not that difficult:

1. get hugin from the repository:

$ cd
$ svn co https://hugin.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/hugin hugin
$ cd hugin/hugin/trunk

2. configure - ccmake does it all automatically, so all you have to do
is press c to configure and g to save the configuration.

$ ccmake .

3. build. might take some time:

$ make

4. test.

$ hugin

5. if the application starts, install

$ sudo make install

Yuv

Keith Martin wrote:
> Yes, very frustrating. But while the phone I have now can play VRs in
> a large 640x480 screen - it is really not much good at all as a
> phone! :-) I might just relegate it to being a pocket VR demo machine
> if I got (or rather when I get) an iPhone.

in German there is this amazing concept of the eierlegende Wollmilchsau
<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierlegende_Wollmilchsau> - can't have an
animal that is good at laying eggs, producing wool and milk and still be
a pork.

for the phone, I would just buy a phone with bluetooth and long battery
life (I am very happy with my seven years old Nokia 6310i - b&w screen
and no polydisturbing sound, although one that has a proper MP3 player
inside could be a bonus).

for mobile computing / VR demo I would get an x86-based subnotebook
rather than a PDA with a weaker CPU.

no place in my world for PDAs nor for smartphones since x86-based
subnotebook have enough juice to go through the day and proper
WiFi/Bluetooth connectivity with a proper display in a form factor
equivalent to PDAs.

Yuv

Sometime around 2/9/07 (at 12:58 -0400) Yuval Levy said:

>for mobile computing / VR demo I would get an x86-based subnotebook
>rather than a PDA with a weaker CPU.

I certainly agree with regards to getting work done, but it is
*incredibly* useful to be able to carry a VR demo machine around in
my pocket.

I wouldn't try to write an article on the iPhone, and I wouldn't use
it for my main email machine either. But I would use it for *quick*
messaging (SMS, IM, email), *simple* browsing, playing music... and
of course making phone calls. :-)

There is the concern of combining too many things and ending up with
a jack-of-all-trades device. But I think the iPhone has trancended
that; it is proving to be at least pretty good at its multiple core
functions. I think it'd do me. And I'll just have to use the Ameo for
VRs, dangit. :-)

k

Great idea, Bernhard.
I just convinced my wife to come with me and booked the hotel :)

cu in linz
juergen





--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bernhard Vogl <bvogl@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Juergen,
>
> You can find me at the Ars Electronica from Friday to Sunday. If
needed
> i'll stay one or two days more.
> So, if you are interested, i'd suggest you come to Linz to see the
> annual "Klangwolke" ( http://www.klangwolke.at/ )
> This year it seems to become more visual attractive than the last
> year...  ;-)
>
> Best regards
> Bernhard
>
> Juergen Schrader schrieb:
> > Bernhard, do you already know when you will be there?
> > At the moment I don't know if I'll have the time to join but if
there
> > is any chance I'd really love to. It would help if I knew which
days
> > to onsider.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Juergen
> >
>

I'd like to start a discussion, I think we should all be having.

As creative people, we all too often rush to have our work displayed,
printed and reproduced.

Sometimes, it's better to say NO! to people and organizations that "want to
give you exposure" in return for little or nothing.

Below is Article 11.. of Google's standard agreement.

This is carte blanche for Google!

Google escapes any legal responsibility for model & property releases, while
getting the content provider

to take full legal responsibility for everything... and paying nothing for
content contribution!

They repeatedly state throughout their "Standard Agreement" that they don't
take copyright from their contributors (except as provided

in Article 11)... below

Bold emphasis is mine..

"11. Content licence from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content
which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By
submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual,
irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to
reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly
display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or
through, the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling
Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked
for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

11.2 You agree that this licence includes a right for Google to make such
Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom
Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to
use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.

11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps
to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your
Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such
changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content
to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or
media. You agree that this licence shall permit Google to take these
actions.

11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power
and authority necessary to grant the above licence."

They take everything... but leave the image owner with their copyright. now
much used and tattered

In short, without property and model releases, the contributor is at great
risk, especially as it appears that Google can design any kind of

service at anytime in the future and use our content as they please.

This is crazy for content providers!



Thoughts on this.



Chris Thomas

Photographer

cell... 403-615-1212

In North America

call... 1-800-870-5110

  <http://www.christhomas.com/> http://www.christhomas.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Chris,

what "Services" does this "Standard Agreement" refer to?

Chris Thomas wrote:
> I'd like to start a discussion, I think we should all be having.

yes, I agree that such issues should be discussed and that content
producers should be aware of them.

> Sometimes, it's better to say NO!

indeed, better say an informed NO than an uninformed YES. Or an
uniformed NO. So what "Services" are we talking of exactly?

Maybe I am missing the point, but so far people on this list are using
GoogleMap on their site, not the other way around. They are not
submitting or posting their content to Google.

Yuv

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Keith Martin <keith@...> wrote:
>
> Sometime around 2/9/07 (at 10:02 +0000) wardnet2001 said:
> > Peter, are you saying you have the non-mobile,
> standard version of Immervision's player working
> on your WM6 phone?
>
>

Hi Keith,

no - not the Standard version is working on this PPC WM6. It´s the mobile
version.

Peter

PS: i had a typo in my last mail:

Hi,
i can really - NOT - confirm that: i can not complain about the quality of
panning on this
device. It´s not as smooth as Spi-V, but to show people what this is all about
quite ok! It´s
very handy to have a small tool around to show as an image tells more than
thousand
words.

Hi Yuv..



Google uses "Services" as a catch-all phrase. They've defined it as any
business activity they now,

or in the future will undertake.

In the instance I'm referring to; their "Service" is to the person or
organization that wants to. for example. post a picture

to .., Google Earth via "Panoramio"



In return for the "Service" of allowing the content provider to "upload".
They take perpetual rights and can even make changes

to content and use it in " yet to be dreamed of " ways in the future.



If you were to post an equirectangular image for regular pano-type viewing,
for example. There's nothing to stop them, from

chopping it up into conventional print format and selling prints or making
"Tiny Worlds"  or spherical icons, or making

any other use of it.. in some future "Service".



Consider this:

You post a Pano at some point in the future. There's a guy with his mistress
arm in arm on a street in Paris.

His wife sees it and a divorce ensues. Google gets sued.

Google sues you. because you didn't have a model release.

Under Article 11. you've agreed to be responsible.



Providers of creative content. beware!

I'm not a lawyer, but as a professional photographer.

I'm more sensitive to copyright and release issues than the average "google
content provider".



Cheers

chris



Chris Thomas

Photographer

cell... 403-615-1212

In North America

call... 1-800-870-5110

  <http://www.christhomas.com/> http://www.christhomas.com



-----Original Message-----
From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Yuval Levy
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 12:43 PM
To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Reasons NOT to post content on Google!



Hi Chris,

what "Services" does this "Standard Agreement" refer to?

Chris Thomas wrote:
> I'd like to start a discussion, I think we should all be having.

yes, I agree that such issues should be discussed and that content
producers should be aware of them.

> Sometimes, it's better to say NO!

indeed, better say an informed NO than an uninformed YES. Or an
uniformed NO. So what "Services" are we talking of exactly?

Maybe I am missing the point, but so far people on this list are using
GoogleMap on their site, not the other way around. They are not
submitting or posting their content to Google.

Yuv



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for clarifying, Chris.

I did not know Google bought Panoramio. Last time I saw Panoramio the
pictures in the service where such crap cluttering GoogleEarth that I
decided to turn it off and have not missed it ever since.

I don't know if Google's take over will do something to improve quality,
but I 100% agree with your points about the (IMO unacceptable) terms and
under such terms and conditions I am not inclined to post there.

They could learn from Flickr (Yahoo) who has a more content producer
friendly licensing which:
1. reasonably restricts usage to the purpose for which the content was
submitted or made available.
2. gives content owners the right to terminate the license.

I don't see much to discuss in Google's licensing terms posted earlier.
As they stand they should be deal-killer for every serious content producer.

Thank you, Google, for sponsoring hugin and freepv development, but NO
THANKS, I won't post my content with you.

Yuv



Chris Thomas wrote:
> Hi Yuv..
>
>
>
> Google uses "Services" as a catch-all phrase. They've defined it as any
> business activity they now,
>
> or in the future will undertake.
>
> In the instance I'm referring to; their "Service" is to the person or
> organization that wants to. for example. post a picture
>
> to .., Google Earth via "Panoramio"
>
>
>
> In return for the "Service" of allowing the content provider to "upload".
> They take perpetual rights and can even make changes
>
> to content and use it in " yet to be dreamed of " ways in the future.
>
>
>
> If you were to post an equirectangular image for regular pano-type viewing,
> for example. There's nothing to stop them, from
>
> chopping it up into conventional print format and selling prints or making
> "Tiny Worlds"  or spherical icons, or making
>
> any other use of it.. in some future "Service".
>
>
>
> Consider this:
>
> You post a Pano at some point in the future. There's a guy with his mistress
> arm in arm on a street in Paris.
>
> His wife sees it and a divorce ensues. Google gets sued.
>
> Google sues you. because you didn't have a model release.
>
> Under Article 11. you've agreed to be responsible.
>
>
>
> Providers of creative content. beware!
>
> I'm not a lawyer, but as a professional photographer.
>
> I'm more sensitive to copyright and release issues than the average "google
> content provider".
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> chris
>
>
>
> Chris Thomas
>
> Photographer
>
> cell... 403-615-1212
>
> In North America
>
> call... 1-800-870-5110
>
>  <http://www.christhomas.com/> http://www.christhomas.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Yuval Levy
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 12:43 PM
> To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Reasons NOT to post content on Google!
>
>
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> what "Services" does this "Standard Agreement" refer to?
>
> Chris Thomas wrote:
>> I'd like to start a discussion, I think we should all be having.
>
> yes, I agree that such issues should be discussed and that content
> producers should be aware of them.
>
>> Sometimes, it's better to say NO!
>
> indeed, better say an informed NO than an uninformed YES. Or an
> uniformed NO. So what "Services" are we talking of exactly?
>
> Maybe I am missing the point, but so far people on this list are using
> GoogleMap on their site, not the other way around. They are not
> submitting or posting their content to Google.
>
> Yuv
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

Greetings,

      A couple years ago I was going to submit a photo into a contest
that the British magazine "Digital Camera" was running. I was new into
all of this and had no idea of what it entailed. I noted on any
submissions, they recommended a reading of the contest rules and
regulations, obviously written by lawyers. I suspect most never did. I
took the time and finally never put an item in. Since the images were
transmitted by email, they effectively had a finished product. By the
rules they owned that submission for any future usage, with credit, but
no future compensation. You also had to be of legal consenting age to
enter.
      An underage person complained he could not get into the contest.
None of the onsite email replies stated exactly why, and most were
probably clueless. I had read the contest rules. So I knew the "rules"
also carried contract language giving the contest providers (the
magazine contest owners) future ownership of any submitted image. By
holding the contest(s), the magazine, and its parent corporation, and
all present and future outside business dealings, would have access to
this huge photo archive. Meaning the contest owners were building a
massive business photo archive, that they did not have to pay for, and
because they owned the images, could resell them to others. They could
collect all future earnings from the images, and the image creator -
might get "photo credit" if they were lucky. To quote Dirty Harry when
he is pointing a gun (or contract) at you,
" Do you feel lucky today? "
      So I fully explained to the frustrated underage photographer, that
by law, he could not enter into their legally binding contract. And
added all of the details for the other readers in the public posting
area so they had a chance to see it too. I suspect most never read the
public postings, just throw their images into the contest for fun.
      So you really have to see contract driven systems, such as some
types of contests, and the content hosting websites, as a method of
people making money off your hard work and giving you nothing. It is a
legal method of slavery, that people enter into, especially when they do
not read the rules. They get to own a part of your creative abilities,
but not you since that is illegal. That should not be a a price for the
creative person to have their work exposed to the world.
      Generally, I do not like the look of photos on a computer monitor.
I am only happy with the exposed printed image. I own it, control its
reproduction, and can sell it. And, I can enter my images into quality
contests, where prints are submitted, and returned to the creator /
submitter. The judges and the public gets to see them. I do not lose my
copyrights, my ownership rights, or my "moral rights". I read up on this
stuff and have rarely posted any images anywhere, due to the unalterable
contractual language that these den of thieves, are employing to sieze
our creations.
      You are much better if you create and host your own website. I
admit to not having got any of this done due to a lack of money and
time. But it will get done in due course. Then I get to fight with the
internet thieves. And I have noted the recent postings of this happening
with code and images.

CHEERS... :-)   Mathew

On Sunday, September 02, 2007 at 13:57, Chris Thomas wrote:

> Google uses "Services" as a catch-all phrase. They've defined it as any
> business activity they now,

Why don't you simply tell us the URL? Ok, searching (with google ;-)
reveals: http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?loc=US

best regards
--
http://www.erik-krause.de

Hello Peter,

I also thought of something like that. The viewer doesn't give that
option, so you would have to program it yourself which is a little too
much for me as a non-programmer. Let's see if enough people request such
a feature to be implemented in the future...  ;-)

Bernhard
>
> It works fine and fast ... it would be an improvement to have a
> capability of panning/zooming into the target ... so you can work in a
> wide view. Then you would need to have a  zoom out feature I guess
> before panning/zooming in to the next target. Akin to the way Google
> Earth implements a tour.
>
>

Rookie2 wrote:
>
> .............
> How does the shimmering look on your computer with this panorama moving?
>
> Deval VR:
> http://www.360mh.com/ns04_dv.html
>
> QTVR:
> http://www.360mh.com/ns04.html
>
> Regarding the size, it got smaller than the others in the serie.
> N.S. 01: 3062 KB
> N.S. 02: 2675 KB
> N.S. 03: 2309 KB
> N.S. 04: 2154 KB
>
> Regards,
> Mahmood
>
>

Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just
an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed
varies considerably from country to country and broadband speed is much
slower between continents. I therefore usually also compress the tiles
separately, compressing much more for the nadir unless there is something of
interest to see there. Usually my compression is: Pano2QTvr quality setting:
60 for Zenith (watch for banding in blue sky), 70 for four around and 40 for
nadir. I also sharpen on a separate layer and then mask out all the
unimportant parts.

Carel Struycken

--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/New-Panoramas-for-critique-tf4364550.html#a12455350
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Right well no word at all from seller after a month. His/her ebay
details are false so no other way to contact them.

However I escalated a paypal claim and after he did not respond to the
complaint for ten days paypal said he still had the money in his
account and refunded my payment. Which was nice. What would have
happened if his account was empty I don't know. Still if you paid by
paypal have a go quick. Its strange as normally I thought crooks take
the money and empty their account to prevent refunds. Makes me wonder
if he just ran away or something, its still a weird way to defraud people.

Anyway the paypal complaint is worth trying.

But my sincerest appologies to anyone who bought one of these due to
my pointing it out. Sorry.

i just fired a calim report to paypal this afternoon.
hopefully i can get back the money as other members here.
really not sure what happened to the seller but was thinking that the
seller really wanted to cheat $$ in the first place... he probably
would set the price higher.

cheers
fatchai.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "hmmsomethingelse"
<hmmsomethingelse@...> wrote:
>
> Right well no word at all from seller after a month. His/her ebay
> details are false so no other way to contact them.
>
> However I escalated a paypal claim and after he did not respond to
the
> complaint for ten days paypal said he still had the money in his
> account and refunded my payment. Which was nice. What would have
> happened if his account was empty I don't know. Still if you paid by
> paypal have a go quick. Its strange as normally I thought crooks
take
> the money and empty their account to prevent refunds. Makes me
wonder
> if he just ran away or something, its still a weird way to defraud
people.
>
> Anyway the paypal complaint is worth trying.
>
> But my sincerest appologies to anyone who bought one of these due to
> my pointing it out. Sorry.
>

Thanks Ricardo,

Nikon D80
Sigma 8mm/3.5
Monopod (Manfrotto)
Home made pahohead

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Ricardo C S Araujo"
<ricardo.araujo@...> wrote:
>
>
> 	 Hi Mahmood,
>
> Very nice panoramas, congratulations!
> Could you tell me the gear you uset in "
> 	 The Swedish Museum of Natural History"?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Ricardo
>
> ----------------------------------------
>
> 			 From: "Mahmood Hamidi"
<mahmood_hamidi@...>
> Sent: sábado, 1 de setembro de 2007 09:32
> To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: SPAM-LOW:  [PanoToolsNG] New Panoramas for critique
>
> I've uploaded a couple of new panoramas, all feedbacks/critiques to
>
> improve the panoramas or/and the site itself are welcome.
>
> www.360mh.com/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mahmood
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi folks,

I'd like to share one of my latest shots, taken in the alps after a
night on the bare rocks.  (Will post biwy picture later).

This area is just as desolate as it looks like. And since (besides
occasionally passing airliners in hi altitude) there is even no sound
from the civilized world you can just watch and listen to the
mountains getting dismantled by natural erosion.

http://www.schrader-air.de/panorama/karwendel/lalider/lalider.html

Enjoy
Juergen

The panoramas I took at the recent IVRPA Conference and related field trips
are finally online at:



http://www.kwayneheil.com/QTVR-UC.htm



All but the Coit Tower view were taken with a Nikon D200, 8mm Nikon using a
monopod and stitched with PTGui Pro. There are still a few stitching errors
that I will try to fix in the future.



If you have time to check it out please let me know if you find any
problems.



Thanks,



Wayne





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I'd like to share one of my latest shots, taken in the alps after a
> night on the bare rocks.  (Will post biwy picture later).
> http://www.schrader-air.de/panorama/karwendel/lalider/lalider.html

It could pass for a moon pano...
Nice moody colours!

Serge.

<It could pass for a moon pano...>

Yes, you bet.
The truth about this tour is, that I arrived there in the night at
full moon with clear skies. All one could wish for to shoot an
extraordinary night pano. But I was so exhausted (and I mean
exhausted) that even after some hot instant noodles I couldn't pull
myself together to shoot some six around.

Juergen


--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Serge Maandag
(yahoo)" <yahoo@...> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to share one of my latest shots, taken in the alps
after a
> > night on the bare rocks.  (Will post biwy picture later).
> > http://www.schrader-air.de/panorama/karwendel/lalider/
lalider.html
>
> It could pass for a moon pano...
> Nice moody colours!
>
> Serge.
>

>
> The panoramas I took at the recent IVRPA Conference and related
field trips
> are finally online at:
>
>
>
> http://www.kwayneheil.com/QTVR-UC.htm

Hi Wayne

These are interesting to look at, thanks. There's no way I would be
able to attend.

I was wondering if anyone has any recording or video of Dr Helmut
Dersch's speech made at this conference. That would be interesting too.

Bill

Hi Bill
I am working on getting the videos I shot at the conference on line.
I had posted the video of the Keynote speech a while back. I will
post again with link to it. I have 11-12 sessions which will be
available for a fee to non IVRPA members as well as IVRPA members. I
will also be offering collections of videos on Data DVD for those who
aren't able to downoad them. there will be 2-3 DVDs available. You
can save some money by Joining the IVRPA if you aren't a member. I
will post a notice here this week.

On Sep 3, 2007, at 1:51 PM, wardnet2001 wrote:
>
> Hi Wayne
>
> These are interesting to look at, thanks. There's no way I would be
> able to attend.
>
> I was wondering if anyone has any recording or video of Dr Helmut
> Dersch's speech made at this conference. That would be interesting
> too.
>
> Bill
>

Cheers
Robert C. Fisher
VR Photography/Cinematography

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Yuval Levy <yahoo06@...> wrote:
>
> Peter Crowley wrote:
> > Is there not a better way (more automated) way to do this?
>
> I use a fully automated method. what you see on that web page is just
> the research that lead to that method.
>
> Yuv
>
First, I forgot to thank you, Yuval, for bringing to my attention that
there was a problem, and also for having a webpage describing how to
fix it.  You have been a great help to me on increasing my
understanding of panoramas.

Here is what I ended up doing in ImageMagick:
<code>
for FACE in front right back left up down
do
	 convert $FACE.tif -depth 8 -resize 1026 -quality 60% -unsharp
"3x1+1.5" $FACE.jpg
done
#  make a stripe of the cube faces (used by flashpanoramas player)
convert -quality 100% front.jpg right.jpg back.jpg left.jpg up.jpg
down.jpg +append $OUTFILE.jpg
</code>

I think it turned out better.  I also tried to extend the contrast per
bob-in-minnesota.  I thought it was good before, but now I'm really
proud.  I wonder if it can get any better?
http://www.rochmn.us/pano.php?name=park&size=Stripe
-Peter

We are using PTgui 7.2 trying to stitch a long panel wall mural.  I
guess thats called an Orthogonal.

We are using a full 35mm sensor Canon 5d with a 19-24lens @ 19mm. We
measured the wall and calculated an image set with a 25 to 30%
overlap.  13 images.  Because its an orthonal projection.. it does not
wrap around.

PTgui used the EXIF data to determine that Lens Settings TAB it was a
Normal Rectilinear (Normal Lens) and Focal Length is 18.9mm.
Multiplyer is 1.005.  Horizontal Field of View is 64.55 for each
image.  Lens calculator told us the VFOV is 86.9 degrees.

Panorama TAB shows a Field of View at 133 degrees x 86.9 degrees

Alignment issues - No control points found.  Had to manually place 3
each pair.

Stitching issues - The images get rounded top and bottom instead of
near flat across top and bottom.  Hard vertical and diagonal lines
refuse to align.

I know this has to be a simple solution we are missing.  Do not know
why PTgui thinks original near flat images must be warped.

I'll try to stitch one of these and post a URL

Hi Dave,

Have you read 6.5:
http://www.ptgui.com/support.html#6_5

Alternatively you may be able to get a good result using the new
viewpoint correction feature in PTGui Pro 7.3 beta. This was intended
mostly for nadir images taken from a different camera position. Consider
it experimental, I haven't tried yet, but it should work for orthogonal
panoramas too:
http://www.ptgui.com/examples/vptutorial.html

Joost


Dave 360texas.com wrote:
> We are using PTgui 7.2 trying to stitch a long panel wall mural.  I
> guess thats called an Orthogonal.
>
> We are using a full 35mm sensor Canon 5d with a 19-24lens @ 19mm. We
> measured the wall and calculated an image set with a 25 to 30%
> overlap.  13 images.  Because its an orthonal projection.. it does not
> wrap around.
>
> PTgui used the EXIF data to determine that Lens Settings TAB it was a
> Normal Rectilinear (Normal Lens) and Focal Length is 18.9mm.
> Multiplyer is 1.005.  Horizontal Field of View is 64.55 for each
> image.  Lens calculator told us the VFOV is 86.9 degrees.
>
> Panorama TAB shows a Field of View at 133 degrees x 86.9 degrees
>
> Alignment issues - No control points found.  Had to manually place 3
> each pair.
>
> Stitching issues - The images get rounded top and bottom instead of
> near flat across top and bottom.  Hard vertical and diagonal lines
> refuse to align.
>
> I know this has to be a simple solution we are missing.  Do not know
> why PTgui thinks original near flat images must be warped.
>
> I'll try to stitch one of these and post a URL
>
>
>

thank you and looking forward for that.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Robert C. Fisher" <bob@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Bill
> I am working on getting the videos I shot at the conference on
line.
> I had posted the video of the Keynote speech a while back. I will
> post again with link to it. I have 11-12 sessions which will be
> available for a fee to non IVRPA members as well as IVRPA members.
I
> will also be offering collections of videos on Data DVD for those
who
> aren't able to downoad them. there will be 2-3 DVDs available. You
> can save some money by Joining the IVRPA if you aren't a member. I
> will post a notice here this week.
>
> On Sep 3, 2007, at 1:51 PM, wardnet2001 wrote:
> >
> > Hi Wayne
> >
> > These are interesting to look at, thanks. There's no way I would
be
> > able to attend.
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone has any recording or video of Dr Helmut
> > Dersch's speech made at this conference. That would be
interesting
> > too.
> >
> > Bill
> >
>
> Cheers
> Robert C. Fisher
> VR Photography/Cinematography
>