1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar


Park Avenue - Arches National Park by Alfred Zhao

Want to add this gigapan to your favorites? Log In or Sign Up now.

Log In now to add this Gigapan to a group gallery.

About This Gigapan

Toggle
Taken by
Alfred Zhao Alfred  Zhao
Explore score
146
Size
77.97 Gigapixels
Views
49007
Date added
Sep 17, 2010
Date taken
Sep 06, 2010
Gear

Canon 7D

Categories
 
Galleries
Competitions
Tags
Description

This set of images were taken at Park Avenue in the Arches National Park. FOV (field of view) is about 150 degree horizontal and 50 degree vertical. I used a 400mm prime lens on a Canon 7D.

The Image was stitched by Autopano Giga on a dual Xeon quad-core system (8 cores) with 32G of memory and 6T of hard drive space. Stitching was done in 10 days and uploaded to gigapan in about 50 hours.

I wrote an automatic image trimmer that automatically trim the stitched image.

The image set contains 76 columns and 39 rows. I was expecting around 30G pixels, however, autopano giga emitted the final image with over 70G of pixels.

I tested a number of existing image stitching software, For a set with more than 1000 images, most of the tools have difficulty to stitch the photos. So far, autopano giga is my choice. Unfortunately, it also failed to stitch set with over 6000 images. In may 2010, I took a city landscape scene with 12,000 high quality images, I still haven't find a solution to stitch them.

One more catch, natural landscape is much easier to be stitched together. For city landscape with strong repetitive pattern on the high rise buildings, it is extremely hard when the adjacent images are almost identical.

Below are my other gigapixel images ordered by size.

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/66626/ - 272G (Shanghai, China)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/57941/ - 43G (Round Lake, IL)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/49265/ - 17G (Shanghai, China)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/58980/ - 15G (Delicate Arch Lower Viewpoint at Arches National Park)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/59054/ - 10G (Artist Point at Yellow Stone National Park)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/59095/ - 9G (Balanced Rock at Arches National Park)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/55552/ - 6G (Niagara Fall)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/60510/ - 2G (Shanghai 1/100 thumbnail)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/59044/ - 2G (Courthouse Towers at Arches National Park)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/59142/ - 1G (Delicate Arch at Arches National Park)

www.gigapan.org/gigapans/59148/ - 1G (Delicate Arch Lower Viewpoint at Arches National Park)


Gigapan Comments (13)

Toggle Minimize gigapan_comment
  1. Alfred  Zhao

    Alfred Zhao (December 20, 2010, 01:53PM )

    Spherical projection is in this panorama, if flat projection is used, the image will be significantly skewed. Flat projection is only good for relatively small image set (based on some empirical results). BTW, just launched another panorama at www.gigapan.org/gigapans/66626/

  2. Jaime Brotons

    Jaime Brotons (September 30, 2010, 09:33AM )

    What type of projection used in Autopano? when using a flat projection on a broad overview the rendered image is much bigger than it should because the ends are stretched to make that projection, would have been nice to eliminate the vignetting in the images of heaven, because in this kind of heaven lens vignetting is very evident, I notice a lack of definition for the equipment used and may be due to the interpolation has Autopano, there are also artifacts in the central zone between heaven and earth that they are not due In any case, congratulations for this great overview.

  3. Greg Downing

    Greg Downing (September 20, 2010, 07:13PM )

    ok great! look forward to seeing your 88gp.

  4. Alfred  Zhao

    Alfred Zhao (September 20, 2010, 06:19PM )

    I agree with your calculation. Looks like Autopano Giga does inflate the image. The next image you will see in two weeks is the true new world record of over 88 Giga optical pixels.

  5. Stoney Vintson

    Stoney Vintson (September 20, 2010, 06:16PM )

    We should report this at the Autopano forum so that they are aware of it and can work on resolving the issue. I have had similar discrepancies between APG and Ptgui.

  6. Greg Downing

    Greg Downing (September 20, 2010, 06:07PM )

    Hi Alphred, This is a very nice image, but I think you are rendering out an image that is much higher than it's native resolution. I put in the source image resolution (3456 x 5184) focal length (400mm) 1.6 crop factor and rendered aov (150 degrees x 50 degrees) in PT GUI and am getting 19.4 gigapixels (241272 x 80424) for a spherical view. Did you use some other projection? Another way to think of it is that the 400mm on a 1.6 crop factor camera captures 3.22 degrees for the long edge that has 5184 pixels. this gives you about 1610 pixels per degree. Multiply that by 150 degrees and you get an image that is 241490 pixels wide and 80496 wide or 19.4 gigapixels.

  7. Alfred  Zhao

    Alfred Zhao (September 20, 2010, 05:53PM )

    There are two new world records on the way. One is a city landscape and the other is artist point at the Yellow Stone National Park. After some tuning and hardware upgrade, I am finally able to stitch the set of 12,000 images. According to Autopano Giga, the full size output will be 922019 x 337052 pixels, which is 310.7G pixels and the final KRO file will be 1.24TB, it will take me at least another two weeks to render the image and upload to gigapan. The true pixel amount will be over 88G pixels based on theoretical calculation.

  8. Terror Pixels

    Terror Pixels (September 20, 2010, 04:26PM )

    Yes, sorry to be critical up front, It's a beautiful picture, you did amazingly well - it's always nice to see a giga that's actually a decent image by itself. I don't understand the way Autopano distorts things, but if it tells you 77, then great!

  9. Gerald Donovan

    Gerald Donovan (September 19, 2010, 06:31PM )

    Hi Alfred - I'm assuming here that the pano is very top heavy (I.e. vertical FoV is mainly above the horizontal)? Autopano seems to have a problem correctly scaling these - I've had it suggest sizes in excess of 200GP before where the vast majority of the pano was above the horizon, when the true size was less than a tenth of that. Obviously not so extreme in you example, but it might have made sense to scale the output down to something more "realistic" before rendering. Look forward to the 12,000 shot pano once you can find software that will cope!

  10. Thomas Hayden

    Thomas Hayden (September 19, 2010, 11:58AM )

    However you got to 77GP, it is a beautiful photo. For those of us who climbed this rock in our youth, it is amazing to get so close again from our desks.

  11. Terror Pixels

    Terror Pixels (September 18, 2010, 06:46PM )

    I'm not sure how you got 77gigapixels out of this, I calculate 53gigapixels without overlap loss. Should be about 40g with 25% overlap. Any idea why/how it output 77g?

  12. Alfred  Zhao

    Alfred Zhao (September 18, 2010, 10:30AM )

    Canon 7D, Canon 400mm F5.6, Gigapan EPIC pro, Macbook pro for data acquisition

  13. Paul Heckbert

    Paul Heckbert (September 18, 2010, 09:14AM )

    Can you tell us what equipment you used to shoot this, and how you stitched it? thanks

The GigaPan EPIC Series, Purchase an GigaPan EPIC model and receive GigaPan Stitch complimentary

Where in the World is this GigaPan?

Toggle

Member Log In