| Moderated by: chrisbet, |
|
|
| 50 GigaPixels anybody?The D800 resolution is nothing! | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted by Robert: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 11:26 | 1st Post |
| http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18536170 Public version in 5 years? Come on Nikon the pixel wars haven't even started yet! 
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by TomOC: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 12:00 | 2nd Post |
Boy, sign me UP !!! 
____________________ Tom O'Connell -Lots of people talk to animals.... Not very many listen, though.... That's the problem. Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh |
| Posted by Squarerigger: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 12:06 | 3rd Post |
| If we have to own the best glass for 36mp what do we have to have for 50,000mp?
____________________ -------------------------------------------- Gary |
| Posted by jk: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 12:41 | 4th Post |
| Big budget. Can be used for stills or video. Just image the hard disk required to save 30 mins of video!!!!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 12:50 | 5th Post |
jk wrote:Just image the hard disk required to save 30 mins of video!!!! Several Drobo's?
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Thu Jun 21st, 2012 17:41 | 6th Post |
| If you can get them to work reliably.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Iain: Fri Jun 22nd, 2012 07:34 | 7th Post |
jk wrote:Big budget. Can be used for stills or video. Just image the hard disk required to save 30 mins of video!!!! And the computer to handle the files. 
|
| Posted by amazing50: Sat Jun 23rd, 2012 09:21 | 8th Post |
| With my GigaPan computerized tripod head I have shot pictures of over a gigapixel in size. Using it is rather like setting up a shot with a plate camera. It takes time and planning, and of course the computer processing time is slow. Many shots only call for a few hundred megapixles and process much faster. See http://www.gigapan.com/cms/shop/store#gigapanstitcher for more info. In my opinion GigaPans' hardware is good but their customer service leaves much to be desired
____________________ There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept ;~) Mike Grace |
| Posted by richw: Sat Jun 23rd, 2012 20:05 | 9th Post |
amazing50 wrote:With my GigaPan computerized tripod head I have shot pictures of over a gigapixel in size. Using it is rather like setting up a shot with a plate camera. It takes time and planning, and of course the computer processing time is slow. Many shots only call for a few hundred megapixles and process much faster. See http://www.gigapan.com/cms/shop/store#gigapanstitcher for more info. Interesting link. I did quite a bit of panoramic stitching a few years ago, mainly using PT Gui, but this site would have interested me then. Photoshop is much better at stitching than it used to be, but I have been a little disappointed with the couple of attempts I have made recently with the Fuji and was thinking about getting PT GUi for the Mac. I might have a look at this software but the head is going a bit far!
|
| Posted by jk: Sun Jun 24th, 2012 02:36 | 10th Post |
| I find the Fuji X100 gives me grat panoramas but if I wan controlled stuff I use my Manfrotto panorama head on my tripod. This unit is expensive but makes pano shots really easy and accurate.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Sun Jun 24th, 2012 03:51 | 11th Post |
| The quest for extreme detail is limited by the ability to display it. I made a very detailed panorama across Morecambe bay of Grange over Sands, using the D1 and 80-200 f2.8 at 200mm. Although 'only' taken with a D1, with careful viewing I could see the glazing bars in windows 4 miles away, easily pick out people walking on the promenade, etc. However, in order to see these details the image needed to be printed at least 11 feet long by about 1 foot high. At that point I lost interest. Perhaps something for the GoS tourist information office? But little other practical application. I do wonder occasionally about repeating the process with the D200 or even the D3100 which I believe has an even higher resolution... But, I really don't know what I would do with the resulting image. It's an interesting process, which I enjoyed but without being able to view the full image easily I see little point. A local chap has made a very nice panorama of the Duddon estuary, with very nice lighting and snow on the Lakeland fells, taken but a few yards from my home. He got around the display problem by splitting the pano into three and placing the sections above one another in a normal 24" x 30" frame, but I wasn't totally convinced by that format, despite it being well presented and nicely framed. The images from the original post camera will never be used to create one full print, more to examine detail on a computer screen by zooming in to 1:1 for surveillance reasons and possibly creating local crops for sharing with others in the department. This is where I have difficulty with the current trend towards even greater definition in general purpose cameras. The practicalities of actually displaying all that detail to a viewer are not insignificant nor easily overcome. Interesting conundrum! 
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Sun Jun 24th, 2012 05:20 | 12th Post |
| You could get an Apple Thunderbolt display and display it in sections. A cheaper alternative is the Dell UltraSharp U2711 which uses the same panel (2560 x 1440 pixels) as the Apple unit but no additional bits like the Thunderbolt interface. There is of course the Dell UltraSharp U3011 as well if you want a larger screen with even more detail 2560 x 1600. All priced accordingly. Hope that you are OK with all that rain in the north of UK.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Sun Jun 24th, 2012 14:18 | 13th Post |
| You miss my point by a mile JK! I am talking about the actual finished print, or whatever... My D1 pano needed printing 10 feet wide in order for all the available detail to be visible. If the available details aren't to be visible in the finished print, why bother capturing them in the first place? Rain? We had a little the other day... Nothing really exceptional. There are a few moaners about but then there always are, lovely sunshine today, it almost made 15ºC.
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by jk: Mon Jun 25th, 2012 02:33 | 14th Post |
| I tried to do some panorama printing back in 2002 when I did a nice one in the Pyrenees. I found at the time that it seemed to be impossible to get my Epson Photo Stylus EX to print longer than 24". I dont know if modern printers can print longer than that it seems to me that if you have roll paper you should be able to print to any length!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by jk: Mon Jun 25th, 2012 02:33 | 15th Post |
| I tried to do some panorama printing back in 2002 when I did a nice one in the Pyrenees. I found at the time that it seemed to be impossible to get my Epson Photo Stylus EX to print longer than 24". I dont know if modern printers can print longer than that it seems to me that if you have roll paper you should be able to print to any length!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by jk: Mon Jun 25th, 2012 02:33 | 16th Post |
| I tried to do some panorama printing back in 2002 when I did a nice one in the Pyrenees. I found at the time that it seemed to be impossible to get my Epson Photo Stylus EX to print longer than 24". I dont know if modern printers can print longer than that it seems to me that if you have roll paper you should be able to print to any length!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
| Posted by Robert: Mon Jun 25th, 2012 04:59 | 17th Post |
| Triple post JK? My lab at Lancaster was quite prepared to print it as long as their paper rolls, 100ft? and even stitch it longer! but the cost was out of my ballpark. They did one 5 ft long for me as a test, and it was pretty good but you needed a magnifying glass to see the smaller detail. Sadly the lab seems to have gone. :-(
____________________ Robert. |
| Posted by richw: Mon Jun 25th, 2012 07:02 | 18th Post |
| How about like this: http://www.360cities.net/gigapixel/strahov-library.html
|
| Posted by Ray Ninness: Fri Jun 29th, 2012 08:08 | 19th Post |
richw wrote: How about like this:Rich, that is some serious mind boggling imagery.. I have looked at several methods for doing those kinds of images, but now days, photography is not in the forefront in my life. So while interesting it's a bit out of my league. 
____________________ Ray Ninness F8Photos.com Bedford, New Hampshire USA |
| This is topic ID = 231 | ||
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Other Makes of Camera > 50 GigaPixels anybody? | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.1641 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 129 queries executed.
Copyright © 2008-2024 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.1641 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 129 queries executed.