-
Shanghai, one of the most populous cities in the world, has never been pictured in such enormous detail. Let the world experience this fast growing city and understand China is always my dream. Through my telephoto lens, I wish you, the viewer, can blend into the daily life in Shanghai and enjoy your virtual visit. ...
-
-
Stats
- Favorites
- 41
- Comments
- 84
- Snapshots
- 836
- Total Views
- 323150
- Explore Score
- 176
GigaPan Comments (84)
Toggle Minimize gigapan_commentRonnie Miranda (December 26, 2010, 06:20AM )
First of all, this is not meant to be critical or negative. I can't seem to get my head around some of the reasons and arguments being presented here. Alfred, you have categorically stated that the goal of this image was to achieve a world record - pure and simple. No one is questioning all the hard work, effort, time, and even money involved in creating this goal. In fact, everyone here can appreciate all that. What bothers some people is, if it is a known fact that Autpano outputs the wrong resolution which you have personally acknowledged in this post , quote "Autopano Giga does inflate the image" and also in the Google PTGUI group , why then did you say that "there is really nothing wrong with the Autopano tool?" This is a contradiction. You also said "since we all use the same tool, we should use the same baseline." If a tool is known to be flawed, why insist on using it much so even as a baseline? Example, if a compass is giving us a wrong reading and pointing us in the wrong direction, should we still continue using it because everyone else does so or because that's how the manufacturer designed it??? That's totally ridiculous. It doesn't make any sense especially for "scientific reasons." You argue that "Autopano Giga has its reason for interpolation" and insist that we should stick to it. At the same time, you complain about the GigaPan website lacking a random image rotation mechanism for the most popular image. But doesn't GigaPan have its reasons as well for computing the explore score and ranking the most popular Gigapan? If you can accept the flawed interpolation of Autopano, why can't you accept the sensible ranking system of GigaPan? Is it because it doesn't serve your purpose? You also said "the community really should put an end to the arm race." Aside from yourself, who ever said that this was a competition? It seems that you have been obsessed with this non-existent competition from the start which resulted in this disputed 272GP. You further emphasized this by declaring "I feel no obligation to make any additional changes. I also should not make revision to their (Wikipedia) entry." Is it because you already "achieved" the world record that now you are calling an end to the "race" and yet, ironically, are already planning your next bigger project with a Mark 1Ds III with 800mm f/5.6? In fairness to Gerald, he clearly stated that Dubai 45 was only intended as a technical test. Therefore, he wasn't out to "compete" with anyone. In contrast, you categorically stated that the Shanghai image was created for the sole purpose of competing and breaking the world record. There seems to be a lot of contradictions, inconsistencies and self-serving reasons. Yes, Sevilla, Sugar Loaf, Kolor, etc. should correct their calculations too - but that's a separate issue. By insisting to use the results of a flawed tool, aren't you just perpetuating the problem - all for the sake of claiming a world record??? Again, everyone here including myself can appreciate and recognize all your hard work in creating this gigapan. There is no doubt about that. What most people are trying to understand is the real motivation to all these. And it seems to be for the fame, the glory and the prestige - which has probably now backfired since there is a dispute going on. There is nothing wrong with achieving a world record. But the issue is about providing accurate representation of your data and results. It is not a question about being fair but rather about doing what is right. If you do so, you'll probably earn more credibility and respect. If fairness is the issue, then it is also not fair for us who do the right thing if you misrepresent your work. As stated by Greg, Wikipedia "is a resource that many people depend on from academics to reporters." Therefore, any entry in Wikipedia must be and should be accurate and legit. I suggest that all so-called "world record" entries that have used Autopano, should be removed until their calculations have been corrected and properly represented. Sorry for the long post. Again, I don't mean to be critical. Just trying to understand and make sense of all these.
Alfred Zhao (December 25, 2010, 08:35PM )
有人能否告诉我，在这个图片上，到底有多少个空调，并且，它们分别是什么品牌的？
Alfred Zhao (December 25, 2010, 08:32PM )
I went to a party tonight and one of my friends suggested a fun project, Can anyone find out how many AC units are in this picture and what's the distribution across all brands. I will post this on other forums and see if this is going to be interesting or not. Will also translate this into Chinese and see if someone will respond.
Chris Zhang (December 25, 2010, 06:20PM )
Great Job! Alfred. I visited Shanghai about two months ago and I was really impressed by how Shanghai has been changed in last 20 years. Your project provides a very unique view of what a visitor will never be able to see by him or her self. Thanks.
Alfred Zhao (December 24, 2010, 09:18PM )
An interesting calculation to share with the community. The theoretical upper limit for 7D 800mm lens and full sphere panorama is 682G pixels. No chance to get into tera pixel range. Even with newer higher density sensor being introduced, the lens probably won't have the resolving power. Besides the number, there is not much additional value. Probably the community really should put an end to the arm race. Instead, concentrate on improving the image quality or getting into more interesting photo subjects.
Alfred Zhao (December 24, 2010, 08:18PM )
Here is the discussion on PTGUI google group -------------------------------------------------- -------------- The real pixel count of a pano can be computed directly from the angular size of the pano and the angular size of one pixel, without any guesswork about overlaps or projections. Here is an example. ----- Your pano covers 175 x 65 degrees and was taken with an 800mm lens on an EOS 7D. Canon's specs give the width of the sensor on the 7D as 22.3mm, and the horizontal pixel count as 5184, so the width of one pixel is 22.3 / 5184 mm. With your 800mm lens, that covers an angle of arcsin ( 800 / pixel width ) which comes out to 0.000311 degrees.----- There are 562,232 pixels in 175 degrees, and 208829 pixels in 65 degrees; product 117,410,395,104 pixels - 117.4 Gpixels. ----- Regards, Tom (note: Tom Sharpless) ----- On Dec 23, 8:14 pm, Sacha wrote: > Fascinating mess in the resolution argument. I've thought about it for > awhile. I think perhaps it should be based on total images subtracting > overlap and using the mtf of the lens. Final pixel size is irrelevant > for obvious or numerous reasons. > > Unsure about generating super size 360s buy I think a giga is wildly > used for a reason. a good area for joost to adress. > > On Dec 23, 5:44 pm, "Alfred" wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, there, > > > First of all, happy holidays to every one! I wish all of you the > > best in the coming 2011. > > > I recently released a large panorama on Gigapan > > athttp://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/6 6626/. This panorama received > > many serious debate about the true pixel count. Since I used > > Autopano, my argument was, when there is no standard way to calculate the total pixel count, we should not manipulate the software output, rather, everyone use the same baseline. > > Then everyone should also provide theoretical estimation of the > > optical pixel count. In this case, 112G pixels. > > > The questions here are: > > > 1. Is there a way to stitch super size panorama in PTGUI? Can > > we emit raw files so that it is not subjected to image format limit? > > > 2. Is there a way to import Autopano config file and process in PTGUI? > > > 3. Can PTGUI accurately report the optical pixel count for > > super size panorama? > > > Thanks! > > > Cheers, > > > Alfred
Karim Saad (December 24, 2010, 07:57PM )
Merry Christmas folks and Peace to the Giga, sorry Terra-pixel community!
Terror Pixels (December 24, 2010, 01:57PM )
If any gigapixel panorama listed using the same method of calculation you have use then yes they should all be changed. It's plain incorrect. I am not meaning to single you out, you just happen to the be the first one that I have seen. - Tom. No one is attacking Alfreds panorama as far as content goes. It's a really brilliant panorama, great looking and something I'd be proud to hang on my wall - it's a great shot! I (and others) are just taking him to task over the incorrect megapixel count. Apparently others are reporting incorrectly also, and we should be demanding they change their method of calculation also. If he weren't proclaiming any record I would have no problem - but to proclaim a record incorrectly is not right.
Alfred Zhao (December 24, 2010, 01:43PM )
The Sevilla image's URL is listed in my comparison at farm6.static.flickr.com/5168/52843 44733_51a7a5430d_b.jpg
. I learned about it
less than a week ago. I do not know their exact
launch date, it was this month too. That's a
great image, also they somehow is using a
completely unfamiliar robotic head. Very cool.
Greg Downing (December 24, 2010, 12:52PM )
Yes I didn't know that the Sugarloaf image used the same method for calculation, I did not see the specs of what they shot with on their entry. Do you know? If so we clearly should invite them to change their entry as well. Which group was the Sevilla team?
Alfred Zhao (December 24, 2010, 12:36PM )
Also, we should invite Sevilla team to create another entry on that page. There will be a dilemma though, where shall they put the entry, in front or after Sugar Loaf entry?
Alfred Zhao (December 24, 2010, 12:26PM )
The optical resolution is listed on the entry now. The image size in terms of pixels is accurate. Unless you post the same demand on RioHK's Sugar Loaf image as well. I feel no obligation to make any additional changes. I also should not make revision to their entry. Please do not use any double standards. Thank you! In addition, RioHK is a research team and should know better about being truthful about their report. Cheers, Happy Holidays!
Greg Downing (December 24, 2010, 11:51AM )
Alfred, given this dispute over the actual resolution, I think you should change the edit that you made in Wikipedia listing your image as the world's highest resolution image en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_phot ographs_in_the_world#Digital_photograph
This is a resource that
many people depend on from academics to reporters.
I think it is clear that the entry should not be
listed as a 272 gigapixel image.
Tom Nelson (December 23, 2010, 08:27PM )
Let's review what we know so far: Alfred has produced an interesting and highly-explorable panorama of enormous size. He has been forthright in explaining his method and how he arrived at his pixel count. He is using Autopano Pro, same as other very large gigapans, and is not using it any differently than other photographers. He has been willing to post an apples-to-apples comparison to other large panos. In contrast, most of his criticism has come from a person with no gigapans and no snapshots. Alfred, I'd advise you to ignore trolls and bask in the glow of your accomplishment. Tom
gigafan8 (December 23, 2010, 07:30PM )
Hi Alfred, This is a true accomplishment. This is certainly a new world record both by image pixel count and optical count by a solo person. You should be proud of yourself. You must be a scientist. I admire your logical response and deep understanding of this field. One suggestion, take it easy on some people's comments. We are here to share knowledge and our passion.
joyray (December 23, 2010, 06:49PM )
太棒了，我很熟这块地方，这是在徐汇的乌鲁木齐路和岳阳路之间的那一片。从来没看到过屋顶上这么多细节。
Alfred Zhao (December 23, 2010, 11:09AM )
To Gerald regarding the resolution calculation, based on the data you provided. 130m vs 750m. The area magnification is 33 times. 800mm lens vs 400mm lens only affect the field of view, it does not change magnification. The snapshot I took on Dubai is 400 times larger than the snapshot I took on Shanghai. Based on this, assuming at the same distance, the snapshot on yours is 12 times larger. The only statement I had on my early post was "the Shanghai image has at least the same resolution if not higher". I like the way you gathered data, this is truly the same spirit we share. BTW, Dubai image is a great one, otherwise, I won't even try to compare the quality in terms of resolution. Also, we were doing the same thing almost the same time of the year (April to May), what a co-incidence. I guess this has something to do with the relatively low cost, yet high quality Gigapan robotic panorama head.
Alfred Zhao (December 23, 2010, 10:44AM )
terrorpixel, I found your comment really strange. The comparison ( farm6.static.flickr.com/5168/52843 44733_51a7a5430d_b.jpg
) about the largest
three panorama is only stating the fact collected
from public information. What's the flaw? If
you provide me an email address, I will send you
the Excel spreadsheet with the calculation logic
and you can try by your own. The only thing you
may dispute about is the percentage overlap in the
Sugar Loaf picture. Here is how it is derived.
They reported horizontal view of 221.5 degree.
Divide by 211 columns, it is 1.050 degree per
image. The horizontal field of view for a 400mm 2X
(800mm) lens is 1.611 degree. Divide 1.050 /
1.611, it is 65%, therefore the overlap is 35%.
0.65 x 0.65 x 18M = 7.6M, this is the amount of
pixels an individual image contribute to the
panorama. 7.6 * 12238 = 93G. This means, Sugar
Loaf is also emit at 100% in Autopano. That is
what other people did also. The only difference is
I reported the theoretical calculation while the
other group didn't. I as an individual work on
this enormous project, I certainly should defend
myself for my hard work. FYI, based on my
knowledge, since 2008, only two person were able
to do similar things solo, one is Gerald and the
other is me. Despite other disagreement, this is
something I definitely should acknowledge Gerald.
Raymond Goldfield (December 23, 2010, 10:05AM )
Since I posted a small comment on this forum, I've seen enough nonsense getting into my mailbox. Why you guys kept attacking someone who truly did some extraordinary work.
Terror Pixels (December 23, 2010, 09:49AM )
Wow you really are desperate to try to prove your flawed method of calculating pixels and claiming a record. You are putting way too much emphasis on this 'record' why? Is it worth lying about? It's clear that you will not change your mind about reporting accurate pixels. Instead you seem bent on just pointing out flaws in other panoramas - this is a shameful display for a photographer of your caliber.