LIRR-GCT tunnel construction article and photos
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
connect the Long Island Rail Road and Grand Central Terminal.
See: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/07/17/nyregion/20080718_SUBWAY_FEATURE.html#
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
> The NYT has an article and photos of the tunnel construction to
> connect the Long Island Rail Road and Grand Central Terminal.
>
That's amazing - I'm talking about the photographic device used to
make that scrollable panorama. It even scrolls up.
Anyone know was device can do that?
Bolwerk
It's called a "camera." I believe that's just a collage. At the bottom
of the page:
"This 360-degree panorama consists of many individual
photographs taken over a short period and stitched into a single
image."
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
It caught people walking. If you don't know how many photographs it
was taking over what amount of time, you really don't have an answer
to the question of what device was used. Do you think a regular camera
was used and someone did a "stop-action" movement of the camera (as
opposed to moving say Gumby)? Some non-trivial device was involved.
Merritt Mullen
<a7f74573-fbc6-418e...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com wrote:
> It caught people walking. If you don't know how many photographs it
> was taking over what amount of time, you really don't have an answer
> to the question of what device was used. Do you think a regular camera
> was used and someone did a "stop-action" movement of the camera (as
> opposed to moving say Gumby)? Some non-trivial device was involved.
As the other poster said, it was an ordinary camera. Anyone can do it
if they have PhotoShop or equivalent software to patch the individual
photos together into one continuous photo. I have done it my self.
I don't know what you mean by "it caught people walking." Any camera
can do that.
If you want to see something more sophisticated, there are photos posted
on the the internet (of train cars!) that have full spherical panning,
left-right 360 degrees, up-down 360 degrees, plus zoom in and out. AND
you can click on a door in the picture and enter the next room. All
real photographs.
Merritt
Bolwerk
The panorama itself was probably made in PhotoShop. I'm sure it can be
done with varying degrees of quality with any camera. The effect of
allowing you to look around could be achieved with JavaScript or Flash.
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
> In article
> <a7f74573-fbc6-418e-8eba-e781d070c...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Anna.Marek6...@gmail.com wrote:
> > It caught people walking. If you don't know how many photographs it
> > was taking over what amount of time, you really don't have an answer
> > to the question of what device was used. Do you think a regular camera
> > was used and someone did a "stop-action" movement of the camera (as
> > opposed to moving say Gumby)? Some non-trivial device was involved.
>
> As the other poster said, it was an ordinary camera. Anyone can do it
> if they have PhotoShop or equivalent software to patch the individual
> photos together into one continuous photo. I have done it my self.
Really, you've done "full spherical panning?" How many photos did you
have to take, how fast did you take them, what tripod did you use? Nor
does Photoshop deliver a mouse-controllable interface. As Bolwerk
says, Flash.
Merritt Mullen
<ce9412a3-8e48-4365...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com wrote:
No, I have not done "full spherical panning". It does take special
equipment for that. I just mentioned you can see photos like that on
the internet. What I have done is make horizontal panoramas. A tripod
is useful, but not necessary, as the software makes adjustments to make
the individual photos (which have some overlap) fit together seamlessly.
Once you have stitched together the panorama image, you just blow it up
to fit vertically on your computer screen and scroll horizontally in a
normal way to see the whole picture. Of course, you can reduce it so
that the whole picture appears at once, but then it is usually very
small vertically.
Merritt
Peter
news:ce9412a3-8e48-4365...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
In theory, 306 degree panning can be done in two shots with a 10.5mm lens
and rectilinear correcting software. For a better effect you should take
three shots.
--
Peter
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
> No, I have not done "full spherical panning".
> It does take special equipment for that.
Oh, darn, cos like that's what I was asking about.
If I had asked about the device boring the tunnel hole, five people
would pop up and tell me it involved a drill bit, I guess.
danny burstein
>Merritt Mullen <mmullen8...@mchsi.com> wrote:
They're "twist drills", thankyouverymuch.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Peter T. Daniels
What happened to "don't feed the trolls"?
Merritt Mullen
<957fc32e-93b4-45f3...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com wrote:
But the pictures of the tunnel were just a horizontal pan, not 360
spherical.
Merritt
Bolwerk
That seemed like a legitimate question. It's just that there was no
particularly special "device."
video guy - www.locoworks.com
>
> But the pictures of the tunnel were just a horizontal pan, not 360
> spherical.
>
> Merritt
If you use the right mouse button, you can tilt up to see the ceiling
(very interesting, that, with hanging points) and down to see the
trash in the water between the rails. Not completely spherical, but
more than just a pan.
Merritt Mullen
<d05c0f60-57c6-4ade...@l8g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
"video guy - www.locoworks.com" <vide...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 19, 9:42?am, Merritt Mullen <mmullen8...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <957fc32e-93b4-45f3-9b14-1f70c6481...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > ?Anna.Marek6...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Merritt Mullen <mmullen8...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > But the pictures of the tunnel were just a horizontal pan, not 360
> > spherical.
> >
> > Merritt
>
> If you use the right mouse button, you can tilt up to see the ceiling
> (very interesting, that, with hanging points) and down to see the
> trash in the water between the rails. Not completely spherical, but
> more than just a pan.
You can do that with any wide-angle photo. It is not the same as a
spherical image.
Merritt
Paul Furman
>
>> See: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/07/17/nyregion/20080718_SUBWA...
The link is snipped when this was xposted to alt.photography.
Nothing to see.
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
The link is correct in the first post in this thread. Then Google
Groups became a little over-protective.
In a separate thread, this answer was posted by dannyb:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?ref=technology
Peter
news:7a945d83-3913-40ae...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
In a separate thread, this answer was posted by dannyb:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?ref=technology
I think I want one.
A question for those of us who are in camera clubs.
Is this one image?
--
Peter
Paul Furman
> On Jul 22, 1:49 pm, Paul Furman <pa...@-edgehill.net> wrote:
>> Anna.Marek6...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>> See: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/07/17/nyregion/20080718_SUBWA...
>> The link is snipped when this was xposted to alt.photography.
>>
>> Nothing to see.
>
> The link is correct in the first post in this thread.
In alt.photography where I'm reading, the first post is missing.
> Then Google Groups became a little over-protective.
>
> In a separate thread, this answer was posted by dannyb:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?ref=technology
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
Paul Furman
It's compiled from many photos with a device that takes the set for you.
There is free software to do the same and usually hand held is adequate
so the device is not really needed.
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
> Peter wrote:
> > <Anna.Marek6...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:7a945d83-3913-40ae...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > In a separate thread, this answer was posted by dannyb:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?ref=technology
>
> > I think I want one.
>
> > A question for those of us who are in camera clubs.
> > Is this one image?
>
> It's compiled from many photos with a device that takes the set for you.
> There is free software to do the same and usually hand held is adequate
> so the device is not really needed.
I guess, but having a gadget for it is cool!
You can always rent the robot finger to friends.
What?
> Peter wrote:
>> <Anna.Ma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7a945d83-3913-40ae...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>> In a separate thread, this answer was posted by dannyb:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?ref=technology
>>
>>
>> I think I want one.
>>
>> A question for those of us who are in camera clubs.
>> Is this one image?
>
> It's compiled from many photos with a device that takes the set for you.
> There is free software to do the same and usually hand held is adequate
> so the device is not really needed.
What a load of total crap.
You are suggesting the all the R&D that has gone into this was a waste
because these guys didn't realize that it wasn't needed to get the same
results? They aren't as smart and experienced as you? Ludicrous!
Just another usenet blowhard aren't you, but one who has nothing but hot
air and BS. I suggest that you actually find out "exactly" what the
device does, then you might realize that there is no combination of
hand-held camera and free software that can come remotely close to it.
I'll be buying one as soon as they become commercially available, it
will take photography in a completely new direction - it is far more
than just a panorama.
Greg Gritton
> Just another usenet blowhard aren't you, but one who has nothing but
> hot air and BS. I suggest that you actually find out "exactly" what
> the device does, then you might realize that there is no combination
> of hand-held camera and free software that can come remotely close to
> it.
>
> I'll be buying one as soon as they become commercially available, it
> will take photography in a completely new direction - it is far more
> than just a panorama.
It looks like a panorama to me. What is the difference you see?
Greg Gritton
Paul Furman
>
> It looks like a panorama to me. What is the difference you see?
The device would be handy if you wanted to do this a lot, I'm just
saying it's not that hard to do occasionally without.
Hmm.. OK it does make much larger panoramas possible:
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/technology/20novel.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
> The GigaPan provides a low-cost alternative to sophisticated motorized camera mounts on the market used to take panoramic photos, said Greg Downing, co-founder of the xRez Studio in Santa Monica, Calif., which specializes in gigapixel photography. The motorized mounts can cost thousands of dollars, he said, and typically require a high-end camera.>>
> Dr. Nourbakhsh said the Carnegie Mellon robotic mount, to be released commercially later this year, would be priced “so that as many people as possible can afford to use it.”
>
> “We hope it will cost in the low hundreds of dollars — well below $500,” he said.
>
> ...
>
> One of Dr. Palmer’s panoramas — of Hanauma Bay on the coast of Oahu in Hawaii — has 1,750 total frames, 25 rows by 70 columns. (http://share.gigapan.org/viewGigapan.php?id=5322) The exposures and number of frames were calculated automatically by the computer inside the GigaPan.
>
> It took about an hour and a half for the robot to shoot the scene in a fairly silent process, with only “a low hum, and the steady click of the camera,” he said.
I wonder if the software working on a predictable set has a lighter load
on computers, hours of processing time. There is freeware you can just
toss a folder of hand-shot jpegs at but it'll fail or crash at some point.
Stephen Sprunk
> Greg Gritton wrote:
>> One of Dr. Palmer’s panoramas — of Hanauma Bay on the coast of Oahu in
>> Hawaii — has 1,750 total frames, 25 rows by 70 columns.
>> (http://share.gigapan.org/viewGigapan.php?id=5322) The exposures and
>> number of frames were calculated automatically by the computer inside
>> the GigaPan.
>>
>> It took about an hour and a half for the robot to shoot the scene in a
>> fairly silent process, with only “a low hum, and the steady click of
>> the camera,” he said.
>
>
> I wonder if the software working on a predictable set has a lighter load
> on computers, hours of processing time. There is freeware you can just
> toss a folder of hand-shot jpegs at but it'll fail or crash at some point.
My digital camera, which was one of the first ones out, came with
software that will stitch a set of photos into a linear panorama. The
camera itself even has a special mode that assists you in lining them up
vertically and with the optimal horizontal overlap. Granted it only
does it on one axis, rather than spherical, the general idea has been
around a long time and works extremely well -- and doesn't require all
that many frames. I did a 360-degree panorama off my roof with ~10
shots in a couple minutes, and it looks beautiful.
S
Anna.Ma...@gmail.com
>
> My digital camera, which was one of the first ones out, came with
> software that will stitch a set of photos into a linear panorama. The
> camera itself even has a special mode that assists you in lining them up
> vertically and with the optimal horizontal overlap. Granted it only
> does it on one axis, rather than spherical, the general idea has been
> around a long time and works extremely well -- and doesn't require all
> that many frames. I did a 360-degree panorama off my roof with ~10
> shots in a couple minutes, and it looks beautiful.
We all would love to see it.
You knew that was coming, right? ;-)
Peter
news:RANhk.16102$mh5....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Peter wrote:
>> <Anna.Ma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7a945d83-3913-40ae...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> A question for those of us who are in camera clubs.
>> Is this one image?
>
> It's compiled from many photos with a device that takes the set for you.
> There is free software to do the same and usually hand held is adequate so
> the device is not really needed.
>
Thanks for the response. I would guess that you are not affiliated with any
camera club.
In an attempt to encourage diversity of content, many clubs have a rule that
only allows one submission of any permutation of an image. For example, in
many clubs members are permitted to submit either a black and white, color
print, or digital slide created from an image. Even though a black-and-white
print will create a different impression than a color print I must make a
choice. It is against the rules to submit multiple crops from a single
image.
On a personal note I think it is a stupid rule. Some individuals work around
the rule by taking multiple shots of the same subject and if it does well,
resubmitting a different print from a different image, even though from an
artistic standpoint they are substantially identical.
--
Peter