Hi, all:

I'm trying to bring in the nadir and zenith images into PTGui on a
handheld pano shot with Canon 5D and Sigma 8mm. This is my first time
using full circular images.

Try as I might, I can't get my initial image parameters set correctly
for Z or N.

  In my usual workflow (Nikon DSLR, Sigma8mm), all I do is set pitch at
+/- 90 degrees for Z and N and adjust yaw. They line up nicely in the
Panorama Editor and all is well.

With the Canon images, Z and N are very distorted in the editor. I can
adjust yaw, but  pitch settings don't seem to work correctly.

Is there something I'm missing here?

I'm at a NPPA (National Press Photographers Association) Multimedia
Immersion seminar, shooting and demonstrating VR. I'd really like to
get this pano done today if at all possible. http://www.nppasummit.org
if you want to take a look. The students' projects will be posted
beginning later today.

Thanks all... hope to see you in Berkeley in a few days.

Best regards,
Gary

--
Gary O'Brien
Photographer | Photo Editor
The Charlotte Observer
http://www.charlotte.com

Hi Flemming,

> "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida"
> by Iron Butterfly.
What a synergy, Flemming. Just when i finished writing this I thought of
this very song! I looked it up on youtube.com and found lots of samples.

Cheers, Milko


--
Milko Amorth
360° Immersive Imaging
Photographic Virtual Reality
VRCanada.ca
604.561.5101
Skype me @ vrdundee
Member of IVRPA.org
Contributor to the World Wide Panorama Project

Hi Gary,

> Is there something I'm missing here?
Most likley the circular crop setting. Check the crop tab. For Z and N you
wont need full fov. Just size it down to what you need, and do your
regular pitches up and down. It should map ok.

Cheers, Milko



--
Milko Amorth
360° Immersive Imaging
Photographic Virtual Reality
VRCanada.ca
604.561.5101
Skype me @ vrdundee
Member of IVRPA.org
Contributor to the World Wide Panorama Project

Kyle Goodnight wrote:
> Remember the Minolta SRT101?? I still have mine which is in mint
> condition. I just cannot remember
> how to use film!! 


That's the stuff with the holes in the sides, right?      =8^)

>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0706/07060101pentax50thdslr.asp God,
>> isn't it COOL!?!? :-O
>> Really Beautyful, Why don't they DO them like that again?? I'd pay
>> for it!!!!




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

Hi Fulvio

Sorry for the confusion. The code looks different as I was trying to
use XHTML compliant methods of embedding the applet.

But here is a version using the old style <applet></applet> method...

http://87.194.33.114/tests/ptvwait/test_applet.htm

This code still produces the same "wait" image problem.

Any ideas?

Dave



--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Fulvio Senore <mailing@...> wrote:
>
> No, I looked at the html code and your page was not using ptviewer.
Now
> you have changed it, but the html still looks very strange. You can
try
> using a more "normal" code, with the <applet> tag.
>
> Fulvio Senore
>
> davidkammerling ha scritto:
> > Hi Fulvio
> >
> > Thanks for taking the time to check my post.
> >
> > If you are saying that you cannot see a panorama at all, it may
be a
> > browser issue. To keep the code as simple as possibly, I only
> > included the code for Internet Explorer (tested on Windows).
> >
> > Here is a version for other browsers that I have tested on
Firefox
> > and Netscape on Windows...
> > http://87.194.33.114/tests/ptvwait/test_other.htm
> >
> > Sorry, I probably should have included it in my original post.
> >
> > Does this help?
> >
> > Whichever browser I use, I get the same "wait" image problem.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Fulvio Senore <mailing@>
wrote:
> >
> >> Your page is not using PTViewer at all.
> >>
> >> Fulvio Senore
> >>
> >> davidkammerling ha scritto:
> >>
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> I hope someone can help me.
> >>>
> >>> The page below contains PTViewer with 3 panos linked by
hotspots.
> >>>
> > I
> >
> >>> am using Fulvio Senore's ptviewer version 2.8.
> >>>
> >>> http://87.194.33.114/tests/ptvwait/default.htm
> >>>
> >>> (in this case, for simplicity, I have kept the object code on
the
> >>> html page rather than using an external js file, and have only
> >>>
> > used
> >
> >>> Internet Explorer object code)
> >>>
> >>> To move between panos, you can either use the hotspots, the
> >>>
> > dropdown
> >
> >>> box or the buttons. All three panos have a "wait" image.
> >>>
> >>> I'm having a problem that occurs only when a web visitor has
Java
> >>> Runtime 6.0 or higher. Below 6.0 and there is no problem.
> >>>
> >>> >From 6.0 and up, if a web visitor uses the dropdown, or one of
> >>>
> > the
> >
> >>> buttons, the wait image either completely fails to appear, or
> >>>
> > worse,
> >
> >>> only a portion of it appears. If they use one of the hotspots
> >>>
> > there
> >
> >>> doesn't seem to be a problem.
> >>>
> >>> Whichever navigation method you choose, the new pano is started
> >>>
> > by
> >
> >>> Javascript using the following code:
> >>>
> >>> function ChangePano(x)
> >>> {document.getElementById("ptvplayer").newPanoFromList(x);}
> >>>
> >>> The part of the ptviewer code for what to do when a hotspot is
> >>> clicked looks like:
> >>>
> >>> u'javascript:ChangePano(1)'
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, to summarise, even though all 3 navigation methods use the
> >>>
> > same
> >
> >>> Javascript code, in Java 6.0 and up clicking a hotspot causes
no
> >>> problems, but using the dropdown or buttons causes problems
with
> >>> the "wait" image. Below 6.0 and all 3 navigation methods cause
no
> >>> issues with the "wait" image.
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone got any ideas of what is going on, or any
suggestions
> >>>
> > of
> >
> >>> any modifications that I could use that will get round this
> >>>
> > problem?
> >
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> Dave
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Kyle Goodnight <krgood@...> wrote:
>
> Remember the Minolta SRT101??  I still have mine which is in mint
condition. I just cannot remember
  how to use film!! 


That explain the mint condition :-)

If the crop circle has been set identically on all the images, then
they will all be remapped (warped) in the same manner.  Use the "Apply
to all images" button on the Crop tab to set the same crop circle on
all images.  In the case of the nadir and zenith, beware of upside down
images that can result from bogus auto rotation sensor values.  If you
choose to have smaller crop circles for the zenith and/or nadir, then
you must select individual lens parameters for those images.

John

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "John Houghton" <j.houghton@...>
wrote:
>
> If the crop circle has been set identically on all the images, then
> they will all be remapped (warped) in the same manner.  Use the "Apply
> to all images" button on the Crop tab to set the same crop circle on
> all images.  In the case of the nadir and zenith, beware of upside down
> images that can result from bogus auto rotation sensor values.  If you
> choose to have smaller crop circles for the zenith and/or nadir, then
> you must select individual lens parameters for those images.
>
> John
>

John:

Crop circle is set identically for all images.

I thought the sensor orientation might be the problem, so I changed
the roll in 90 degree increments. Doesn't seem to work.

I have to confess I know how to push the buttons in PTGui, but I'm not
clear on what actually happens. When you say select individual lens
params for the cropped Z and N, do I need to change other params
beside pitch for those cropped frames?

thanks for the help,
Gary

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...> wrote:
>
> Kyle Goodnight wrote:
> > Remember the Minolta SRT101?? I still have mine which is in mint
> > condition. I just cannot remember
> > how to use film!! 

>
> That's the stuff with the holes in the sides, right?      =8^)
>

You mean those cartidges, no wonder that the people tend do not use
those, the pull thing is way too long, sometimes more than 1 metter or
so, and one must pull real hard at the end to unseal and begin to use
that, much better (and short) on modern tonner cartridges used today :-
)

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "gobrien1911" <gary@...> wrote:
> Crop circle is set identically for all images.
>
> I thought the sensor orientation might be the problem, so I changed
> the roll in 90 degree increments. Doesn't seem to work.

If you look on the Source Images tab, you should see all the image
thumbnails in the same orientation.  If any image is upside down, that
may be evident by inspecting the positions of the crop circle, which
has been set the same on all images.  Often, the lens axis is not
precisely aligned with the centre of the sensor.  This leads to an off-
centre image circle.  When an image is upside down relative to the
other images, the crop circle then won't align accurately with the
image circle.  This causes problems in optimization.

> I have to confess I know how to push the buttons in PTGui, but I'm not
> clear on what actually happens. When you say select individual lens
> params for the cropped Z and N, do I need to change other params
> beside pitch for those cropped frames?

If you have different crop circles on the nadir/zenith, you must select
individual lens parameters - i.e. fov,a,b,c,d,e.  If you reduce the
size of the crop circle, you decrease the fov of the (cropped) image.
Assigning +90 to the pitch of the zenith image merely positions it at
the top of the stitching sphere.  It will appear to spread out across
the top of the equirectangular output image.  Varying yaw or roll
values will rotate it in that position.  Of course, assignment of
control points and optimization will locate the zenith image in its
correct position anyway.

John

So much choice!
Here's some more classic cool cams ...
http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/panorama_cameras.html
and if your view is a little restricted try this ...
http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/melvin_vaniman.html
Cheers Michael

dorindxn wrote:
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...> wrote:
>> Kyle Goodnight wrote:
>>> Remember the Minolta SRT101?? I still have mine which is in mint
>>> condition. I just cannot remember
>>> how to use film!! 

>> That's the stuff with the holes in the sides, right? =8^)
>>
>
> You mean those cartidges, no wonder that the people tend do not use
> those, the pull thing is way too long, sometimes more than 1 metter or
> so, and one must pull real hard at the end to unseal and begin to use
> that, much better (and short) on modern tonner cartridges used today :-)

I would just cut it off so I didn't have to deal with throwing it
away.      =8^)




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

Milko Amorth wrote:

  > No effects. Binaural stereo sound. 2 micro phones in each ear
  > of a dummy head, really.


Milko is right.  If you have lotsa money, get "Fritz" (Neuman KU100):

<http://www.coutant.org/ku100.html>

But I'm cheap, so I use tiny microphones clipped to the arms of my
sunglasses next to my ears.  Not as spatially 3D-accurate as "Fritz",
but good enough for sounds located > 4m away.

Back in the dark ages I used to use Coresound binaural mics:

<http://www.core-sound.com/mics/1.php>

... good for loud stuff, but useless for natural recordings (poor
self-noise characteristics).

Consequently, about six years ago I made my own rig using a pair of DPA
4060-BM miniature mics:

<http://www.dpamicrophones.com/module.php?MID=101&itemid=4060-
BM&PID=&function=pdescription>

Much better noise-floor dB.

Now that I am no longer doing VR and have a real job which pays real
money..., I plan on eventually upgrading my sound rig to a fully
solid-state 24-bit recorder and a pair of much better compact mics.



Regds,

Andrew N.
<http://nemeng.com>
Blue Mountains Australia

From Michel Thoby's experiment some months ago, where he shot a spherical
panorama using both the 10mm and the 17mm setting and from Bernhard's recent
remark:
[quote] "The basic idea arises from the fact that i am not content with the
typical "pseudo-resolution" a Bayer sensor offers. I have seen in various
situations that reducing the resolution dramatically increases
quality."[endquote]
Does this mean that reducing the resolution of the image that was shot at
17mm zoom-setting to the same resolution as the rest of the pano would still
result in more detail/quality in that part of the equirectangular...? In
Michel's test pano it is difficult to compare the quality of the different
zoom setting, because the objects are at such different distances. Is the
difference in quality large enough to bother?

Carel
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-mixed-FOV-with-10-17mm-lens-in-panorama-tf3858380.ht\
ml#a10931218
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Is there a way to extract an equirectangular image from a MOV?

I need to be able to do this and maintain the initial view in the
repositioned MOV (that's very different from the original
equirectangular image).  In effect I want to decompile the MOV.  I don't
want to have to go back and regenerate the equirectangular image from
PTGui because ofttimes there is MAJOR post-production work that I don't
want to be forced to do all over again.

I'm on a PC if that effects your answer.




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

Hello Pat,

use extractjpeg for that, drag and drop your .mov on the exe in archive
the use pano2qtr to produce equirectangular from cubic faces (the
cubic faces wil be produced in the same folder with .mov)

Dorin

Sunday, June 3, 2007, 12:59:46 AM, you wrote:

PS> Is there a way to extract an equirectangular image from a MOV?

PS> I need to be able to do this and maintain the initial view in the
PS> repositioned MOV (that's very different from the original
PS> equirectangular image).  In effect I want to decompile the MOV.  I don't
PS> want to have to go back and regenerate the equirectangular image from
PS> PTGui because ofttimes there is MAJOR post-production work that I don't
PS> want to be forced to do all over again.

PS> I'm on a PC if that effects your answer.




PS> Pat Swovelin
PS> Cool Guy @ Large





--
Best regards,
  Dorin                            mailto:dorin@...

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

> From Michel Thoby's experiment some months ago, where he shot a
spherical
> panorama using both the 10mm and the 17mm setting and from
Bernhard's recent
> remark:
> [quote] "The basic idea arises from the fact that i am not content
with the
> typical "pseudo-resolution" a Bayer sensor offers. I have seen in
various
> situations that reducing the resolution dramatically increases
> quality."[endquote]

Carl, do you have the links to the references your noting?

I'm at a lost as to why reducing the resolution could in any way
improve the quality if all other factors remain the same. Perhaps it
removes some of the complexity or imperfections of the real world?
Like a skin makeover in a fashion magazine?

Regards,

Robert

Robert Harshman wrote:
>
>
> Carl, do you have the links to the references your noting?
>
> I'm at a lost as to why reducing the resolution could in any way
> improve the quality if all other factors remain the same. Perhaps it
> removes some of the complexity or imperfections of the real world?
> Like a skin makeover in a fashion magazine?
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
>

According to Bernhard it has to do with the sensor which was mentioned in
this thread:
http://tinyurl.com/2eso2s
[quote] "The basic idea arises from the fact that i am not content with the
typical "pseudo-resolution" a Bayer sensor offers. I have seen in various
situations that reducing the resolution dramatically increases
quality."[endquote]

The link to Michel Thoby's experiment is:
http://tinyurl.com/2h5dzb  (scroll down a bit)

Carel
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-mixed-FOV-with-10-17mm-lens-in-panorama-tf3858380.ht\
ml#a10932495
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

> According to Bernhard it has to do with the sensor which was mentioned in
> this thread:
> http://tinyurl.com/2eso2s
> [quote] "The basic idea arises from the fact that i am not content with the
> typical "pseudo-resolution" a Bayer sensor offers. I have seen in various
> situations that reducing the resolution dramatically increases
> quality."[endquote]
>
The basic idea should be more understandable if you look how a bayer
sensor actually works: Actual per-pixel color values are derived by
interpolation of a 2x2 field.
If you reduce resolution, you can approximate to a per-pixel color
accuracy comparable to what a Foveon sensor can deliver. See the
following test for image quality comparison of both sensors:
http://www.ddisoftware.com/reviews/sd9-v-bayer/
The reality is somewhat more complex as the test may suggest, but it's a
good aid for pointing out the basic principle (of resolution reduction).

Best regards
Bernhard

Dorin Godja wrote:
> Hello Pat,
>
> use extractjpeg for that, drag and drop your .mov on the exe in archive
> the use pano2qtr to produce equirectangular from cubic faces (the
> cubic faces wil be produced in the same folder with .mov)

That gives me the 6 cube faces but I need an equirectangular image
centered in the initial view of the MOV. If I can't extract the
equirectangular image directly how can I generate it from the 6 cube faces?

> Dorin
>
> Sunday, June 3, 2007, 12:59:46 AM, you wrote:
>
> PS> Is there a way to extract an equirectangular image from a MOV?
>
> PS> I need to be able to do this and maintain the initial view in the
> PS> repositioned MOV (that's very different from the original
> PS> equirectangular image). In effect I want to decompile the MOV. I don't
> PS> want to have to go back and regenerate the equirectangular image from
> PS> PTGui because ofttimes there is MAJOR post-production work that I
> don't
> PS> want to be forced to do all over again.
>
> PS> I'm on a PC if that effects your answer.




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

You can load them in Pano2QTVR and convert to equirectangular, I think
it's the easiest and fastest.
Regards,
Rodolpho Pajuaba

Pat Swovelin wrote:
> Dorin Godja wrote:
>

>
> That gives me the 6 cube faces but I need an equirectangular image
> centered in the initial view of the MOV. If I can't extract the
> equirectangular image directly how can I generate it from the 6 cube faces?
>
>

Rodolpho Pajuaba wrote:
> You can load them in Pano2QTVR and convert to equirectangular, I think
> it's the easiest and fastest.

It's times like this when I feel like the scarecrow in The Wizard of
Oz.  You know, that part when he says "If I only had a brain."  D'oh!

I did put them into Pano2QTVR and completely missed the Convert to
Equirectangular button.  Do you think it's too big?      =8^)

Be that as it may it did give me an equirectangular but it's all jumbled
up.  What is the correct naming order for the cube faces (it's obviously
incorrect the way it came out of  the disassembler)?

> Regards,
> Rodolpho Pajuaba
>
> Pat Swovelin wrote:
>> Dorin Godja wrote:
>>
>
>> That gives me the 6 cube faces but I need an equirectangular image
>> centered in the initial view of the MOV. If I can't extract the
>> equirectangular image directly how can I generate it from the 6 cube
>> faces?




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

Hello Pat,

try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
_0  then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5

Dorin

Sunday, June 3, 2007, 7:02:16 AM, you wrote:

PS> Rodolpho Pajuaba wrote:
>> You can load them in Pano2QTVR and convert to equirectangular, I think
>> it's the easiest and fastest.

PS> It's times like this when I feel like the scarecrow in The Wizard of
PS> Oz.  You know, that part when he says "If I only had a brain."  D'oh!

PS> I did put them into Pano2QTVR and completely missed the Convert to
PS> Equirectangular button.  Do you think it's too big?      =8^)

PS> Be that as it may it did give me an equirectangular but it's all jumbled
PS> up.  What is the correct naming order for the cube faces (it's obviously
PS> incorrect the way it came out of  the disassembler)?

>> Regards,
>> Rodolpho Pajuaba
>>
>> Pat Swovelin wrote:
>>> Dorin Godja wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> That gives me the 6 cube faces but I need an equirectangular image
>>> centered in the initial view of the MOV. If I can't extract the
>>> equirectangular image directly how can I generate it from the 6 cube
>>> faces?




PS> Pat Swovelin
PS> Cool Guy @ Large

Dorin Godja wrote:
> Hello Pat,
>
> try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
> _0 then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5

I figured out the correct order but the problem is that it's extracting
the faces of the cube that is in the MOV vs. extracting the faces of the
MOV after it's been repositioned.  This can be easily tested by
repositioning the MOV with a specific object in the center of the
initial view and saving it.  When Qmove2 JPG is run none of the faces
are centered around that specific object but one should be if it were
extracting the "current" cube faces vs. the original ones..

There's got to be a way that I can extract the current faces in the MOV
as opposed to the original faces in the MOV.  Then when I convert them
to an equirectangular with Pano2QTVR it will have the same initial view
as the original MOV.

> Dorin
>
> Sunday, June 3, 2007, 7:02:16 AM, you wrote:
>
> PS> Rodolpho Pajuaba wrote:
>>> You can load them in Pano2QTVR and convert to equirectangular, I think
>>> it's the easiest and fastest.
>
> PS> It's times like this when I feel like the scarecrow in The Wizard of
> PS> Oz. You know, that part when he says "If I only had a brain." D'oh!
>
> PS> I did put them into Pano2QTVR and completely missed the Convert to
> PS> Equirectangular button. Do you think it's too big? =8^)
>
> PS> Be that as it may it did give me an equirectangular but it's all
> jumbled
> PS> up. What is the correct naming order for the cube faces (it's
> obviously
> PS> incorrect the way it came out of the disassembler)?
>
>>> Regards,
>>> Rodolpho Pajuaba
>>>
>>> Pat Swovelin wrote:
>>>> Dorin Godja wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That gives me the 6 cube faces but I need an equirectangular image
>>>> centered in the initial view of the MOV. If I can't extract the
>>>> equirectangular image directly how can I generate it from the 6 cube
>>>> faces?




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

On 3 Jun 2007 at 1:08, Pat Swovelin wrote:

> Dorin Godja wrote:
> > Hello Pat,
> >
> > try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
> > _0 then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5
>
> I figured out the correct order but the problem is that it's extracting
> the faces of the cube that is in the MOV vs. extracting the faces of the
> MOV after it's been repositioned.  This can be easily tested by
> repositioning the MOV with a specific object in the center of the
> initial view and saving it.  When Qmove2 JPG is run none of the faces
> are centered around that specific object but one should be if it were
> extracting the "current" cube faces vs. the original ones..
>
> There's got to be a way that I can extract the current faces in the MOV
> as opposed to the original faces in the MOV.  Then when I convert them
> to an equirectangular with Pano2QTVR it will have the same initial view
> as the original MOV.

I'm not quite sure if I understand your problem?

Are you simply trying to get an equirect with the center of it at the  same pan
value as
in the original mov?
Can't you just do that very easily with the offset tool in PS? Or use PTgui to
do it (as
well as assemble the cube faces)?
But if you want this as an automated process, reading the initial view from the
.mov and
all, it's a totally different story...--
Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...> wrote:
>
> Dorin Godja wrote:
> > Hello Pat,
> >
> > try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
> > _0 then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5
>
> I figured out the correct order but the problem is that it's extracting
> the faces of the cube that is in the MOV vs. extracting the faces of the
> MOV after it's been repositioned.  This can be easily tested by
> repositioning the MOV with a specific object in the center of the
> initial view and saving it.  When Qmove2 JPG is run none of the faces
> are centered around that specific object but one should be if it were
> extracting the "current" cube faces vs. the original ones..
>
> There's got to be a way that I can extract the current faces in the MOV
> as opposed to the original faces in the MOV.  Then when I convert them
> to an equirectangular with Pano2QTVR it will have the same initial view
> as the original MOV.

You can only do this on Mac with Cubic Converter.

But it is easy to just open it in photoshop and change the view with the offset
filter.

Hans

Bjørn K Nilssen wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2007 at 1:08, Pat Swovelin wrote:
>
>> Dorin Godja wrote:
>>> Hello Pat,
>>>
>>> try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
>>> _0 then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5
>> I figured out the correct order but the problem is that it's extracting
>> the faces of the cube that is in the MOV vs. extracting the faces of the
>> MOV after it's been repositioned. This can be easily tested by
>> repositioning the MOV with a specific object in the center of the
>> initial view and saving it. When Qmove2 JPG is run none of the faces
>> are centered around that specific object but one should be if it were
>> extracting the "current" cube faces vs. the original ones..
>>
>> There's got to be a way that I can extract the current faces in the MOV
>> as opposed to the original faces in the MOV. Then when I convert them
>> to an equirectangular with Pano2QTVR it will have the same initial view
>> as the original MOV.
>
> I'm not quite sure if I understand your problem?
>
> Are you simply trying to get an equirect with the center of it at the
> same pan value as
> in the original mov?

No, I need to be able to do it with the MOV's current initial view.

> Can't you just do that very easily with the offset tool in PS?

No, because that will wrap the distorted top and bottom edges to
someplace in the middle of the image if the repositioned MOV's initial
view is looking up.

> Or use PTgui to do it (as
> well as assemble the cube faces)?
> But if you want this as an automated process, reading the initial view
> from the .mov and
> all, it's a totally different story...--

It doesn't have to be automated but I do want to be able to extract an
equirectangular image from a MOV and be able to create, for example, a
Flash pano with the same initial view as the MOV.

> Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

Hans Nyberg wrote:
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...> wrote:
>> Dorin Godja wrote:
>>> Hello Pat,
>>>
>>> try to locate up that's _4 then what match without rotation with up is
>>> _0 then go matching to the right in order _1 _2 _3 the down is _5
>> I figured out the correct order but the problem is that it's extracting
>> the faces of the cube that is in the MOV vs. extracting the faces of the
>> MOV after it's been repositioned. This can be easily tested by
>> repositioning the MOV with a specific object in the center of the
>> initial view and saving it. When Qmove2 JPG is run none of the faces
>> are centered around that specific object but one should be if it were
>> extracting the "current" cube faces vs. the original ones..
>>
>> There's got to be a way that I can extract the current faces in the MOV
>> as opposed to the original faces in the MOV. Then when I convert them
>> to an equirectangular with Pano2QTVR it will have the same initial view
>> as the original MOV.
>
> You can only do this on Mac with Cubic Converter.

*Aarrrgh!*  There's got to be a way to be able to do it on a PC.

> But it is easy to just open it in photoshop and change the view with
> the offset filter.

Not if the initial view is tilted up/down because that will wrap the
distorted top and bottom edges to someplace in the middle of the image.

> Hans




Pat Swovelin
Cool Guy @ Large

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...> wrote:
>
> *Aarrrgh!*  There's got to be a way to be able to do it on a PC.
>
>
>
>


Pat, you have two things here, for example an equirectangualr could
have a door in middle but one can set as a starting point/view in .mov
a window or someting on the ceiling, still remain that equirectangular
with door in middle, so on the Mac way or PC way you can obtain what
you want but will not be the same thing, if you want to obtain same
start in a flash panorama you can use that "door in middle equirect"
wich you eventually obtain from extracting and converting in equirect,
and to set in that viewer pan, tilt and zoom for start as them are
in .mov

I you wish you can manage to put the window in middle of the equirect
openning that file in PTgui and set yaw, pitch, roll accordingly but
you will end up with a different equirect you'll see then why.


Dorin

> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Pat Swovelin <Panoramas@...>
> wrote:
>
> *Aarrrgh!*  There's got to be a way to be able to do it on a PC.
>
>> But it is easy to just open it in photoshop and change the view
>> with the offset filter.
>
> Not if the initial view is tilted up/down because that will wrap
> the distorted top and bottom edges to someplace in the middle of
> the image.
>
>> Hans
>


Maybe this will help?

o) Create and equirectangular image from the Cube-faces with Pano2QTVR.

o) Use Photoshop and Panorama Tools like this:
- With PTAdjust Extract a 360 degree view (!)
Image settings:
HFOV: 360
Width and Height: = Same as original panorama Width and Height,
Format: PSphere
Yaw and Pitch: = Wherever you want your initial view

Panorama Settings:
HFOV: 360
Format: PSphere

After this I think you'll get the view that you want. However if you've
adjusted the Pitch, then you'll get a wavy horizon!


Regards,
Ingemar Bergmark
http://panoramas.bergmark.com