My 1st 3Dimensional Full 360 Panorama!

Been wanting to know how to do this for 5 years, finally figured it out this
week exported in quicktime format.

A fully 3d pan of my studio, comprised of 52 individual shots taken on a
tripod with my Canon A620.
http://photos.seph.ca/studiopics/studioqt1.mov
Cool, n'est ce pas?

Seph

http://seph.ca
http://photos.seph.ca

 

That is indeed cool! however I have two questions!!
What programme did you use to compile the panorama and make the movie?
Why do you have a carpet stuck to the ceiling!!! )

 

--
X-No-Archive: yes

very nicely done

I like the picture on the ceiling
the acoustic sound proving , is it egg boxes?

 

yes, they work great and were cheap as hell.

 

ptgui, then pano2qtvr
~S~
I did not take pics of the complete ceiling, so I filled it in with a
mandala!

 

What do you need to view in 3D ... I see no depth in these images.

 

I guess 3d is stretching it, but it is reasonably close.
But in answer to your question:

BC BUD



~S~

 

that took 52 shots??
seems like a fewer would work in such small area??
why not just take a video cam shot and pan around?? or are these kind of
images usually made from stills??

nice effect though the virtual look around..would like that for my site
too....
when I think studio I always think photos (hehe) wasn't thinking music at
all................our egg crates are Styrofoam
all that cardboard, hope you got a dust buster vac...............
and put your slippers away!!

 

Though fewer shots would 'cover the area', you'd run into lens distortion
because of the wider angle used. A small space takes more shots as the
recommended 50-60 mm setting intends less area captured.

Case of quality vs 'speed'.

 

Better than those ugly fisheye ones imo.
Tho I would only need to take 6 shots with a fisheye, would be a blessing.
Think within the cube!

~S~

 

What do you need to view in 3D ... I see no depth in these images.

I don't think he meant they were 3D pictures; some folks call 'em that
because it's a 360 degree image which can be panned in three dimensions,
left/right, up/down, and zoom in/out. The image isn't 3D; your "motion"
through it is.

This particular one, however, does not allow zoom, as far as I can see, so
it's actually 2D.

Some of these don't allow up/down, either, so I guess they'd be 1D.

 

d'OH ... that's why they're 'ugly' ... lens distortion!
SFAR

 

You need to drag it around with your mouse to get a 360X360 degree
view of the room. It's more a complete panorama rather than 3D.

Ron

 

it does allow zoom
your browser is set to 1024 or lower. Mine is higher.
It was exported at 1024, so you don't see the edge at your resolution.
~S~

 

My latest new pan:
the portfolio will grow!
http://photos.seph.ca/2007/pans/ste-anne/Ste-Anne-Boardwalk-Jan-9-360.mov

~S~

 

That what I see/do, so then it's NOT 3D !!!

Kirk Splaat

 

I guess nothing on a two dimensional screen is truly 3D but the
ability to move the panorama through three demensions is as much faux
3D as anything on a computer monitor. Btw your cap locks seems to be
stuck on certain letters.

 

up the meds

 

Don't GUESS !!!

There -=are=- three dimensional processes available for computer monitors
and are often used. Look up "anaglyph"

No ... keys are clear - it's called "EMPHASIS for dummies".

 

no, its called tremendous self-importance, and its your prob, no one else's.
but thanks for the point in the right direction.
Egomaniacs never fail to impress, or at least they die trying to.
Yes, I ended on a preposition.
Sue me.

~S~