Filesize vs. image quality ?

Techniques, tips and tricks, tutorials
pano360
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:25 pm

Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby pano360 » Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:59 pm

Hey !

Great to see the forum is back.

I haven't been playing with panoramas for quite some time now and I was wondering what's the norm for good quality, full screen panos these days ?

How much is enough ? 8000x4000 equi > downsampled to 1300 px cubefaces like I used to do ? Would it be ok ? What JPG quality do you use? How many MB ?

Thanks,
J.

VRwave
Site Admin
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 5:30 pm

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby VRwave » Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:52 pm

Welcome back, J. !

I would say using 1900x1900 px cubefaces is good enough (this is about 6000x3000 in equirectangular projection) and using 70-75 JPG compression should produce 2.5 - 3 MB panos, or less, provided your panos are noise free (low ISO, good RAW/NEF processing, proper sharpening).

But if you want to be future proof you could use a multi-resolution Flash panorama player, like krpano and display your full resolution original image.

I hope this answers your question.

Milos
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:26 pm

Converting from equirectangular to cubic faces

Postby Milos » Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:34 pm

How do you make the conversion from equirectangular to cubic faces ... you just divide it by Pi (3.14) ?

6000/Pi=1910 pixels

VRwave
Site Admin
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 5:30 pm

Re: Converting from equirectangular to cubic faces

Postby VRwave » Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:45 pm

Milos wrote:How do you make the conversion from equirectangular to cubic faces ... you just divide it by Pi (3.14) ?


Yes, this is how Pano2QTVR does it.

omnipix
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:37 am
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Contact:

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby omnipix » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:20 pm

When using Pano2VR (the successor to Pano2QTVR) and it's multi-resolution options I have found that a native starting tile of 1624px fits my needs when comparing image quality vs file size for fullscreen display.

I actually make the 1624px cubes the embedded tiles of the standalone .swf file and all higher resolution tiles are called in stages of zooming from a separate external directory. My next jump is 2320px cubes and these are called after minimal zoom if the person finds the scene interesting enough. Of course by doing this, only the tiles required of the panorama "in view, on screen" are downloaded reducing bandwidth for both parties. Basically if you don't zoom the higher resolution tiles are never called. My tiles are 464px each regardless of resolution and I keep all cube faces divisible by this figure, meaning every tile is a perfect 1:1 464px square.

Regards, Smooth 8-)
Image

pano360
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby pano360 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:35 pm

Thanks guys

Looks like I'll be getting one of the multi-resolution players. It's either Pano2VR or KRpano, what do you recommend ?

omnipix wrote:I actually make the 1624px cubes the embedded tiles of the standalone .swf file ... My next jump is 2320px cubes ... My tiles are 464px each regardless of resolution and I keep all cube faces divisible by this figure, meaning every tile is a perfect 1:1 464px square.

Smooth, great info, man ! I'll try to remember to use those sizes.

omnipix
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:37 am
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Contact:

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby omnipix » Tue Mar 15, 2011 2:46 pm

pano360 wrote:Looks like I'll be getting one of the multi-resolution players. It's either Pano2VR or KRpano, what do you recommend ?

Well, I use Pano2VR but it is obvious that KRP is the superior pano player as far as programmable coded features are concerned (if you require them). That said, just about everybody owns a Pano2VR license because the program offers serious tools that just about everyone needs in one way or another regardless of the final player they choose to project with.

Pano2VR suits me and has a long history, constant improvements and a GUI. KRP is well respected by some serious panographers also, but lacks the GUI.

Test both and see what you like.

Regards, Smooth 8-)
Image

pano360
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby pano360 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:09 pm

omnipix wrote:Test both and see what you like.

Thanks Smooth, I'll give them a go.

Raffi
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:51 pm

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby Raffi » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:23 pm

Multi resolution, the best thing since sliced bread :D

I wonder if there's any way to determine how the users are viewing the tour, how many use the zoom feature and how much they zoom in, if they switch to the full screen display and whatnot.

Aldowin
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Filesize vs. image quality ?

Postby Aldowin » Thu Jan 14, 2016 10:04 am

final player they choose to project with.
น้ำเต้าปูปลา


Return to “Questions and Answers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests