This 320-gigapixel snap of London is size of Buckingham Palace In a final squeeze of Olympics juice from London's triumphant summer of sport last year, British Telecom has released a world record-breaking panoramic photo of the city taken from the top of the BT Tower. A 360 panorama of London taken from the BT Tower Click to view the map The 320 gigapixel snap is made up of 48,640 …
It isn't dragging, it's panning.
You move the mouse in the direction in which you want the "camera" to pan, hence the arrow that appears.
If you were dragging it you'd get the grabbing hand cursor, I'd have thought.
Big Brother because I've not yet found anyone doing anything untoward in any of the windows......... But I'm going to keep looking. :-D
At last! I have always thought it was me being the odd one out. I too think the intuitive way to drag these images should be the reverse of what seems to be the norm - there are certainly enough comments to suggest we are in the majority.
Anyway - What a great photo!
Same thoughts here, but I clicked anyway. it takes you to a BT site and a fully panable and zoomable application that I think is pretty damned good.
I wonder, though, what the local residents will think when they see that views through their bedroom and bathroom windows are being presented to the world's Peeping Toms?
"I wonder, though, what the local residents will think when they see that views through their bedroom and bathroom windows are being presented to the world's Peeping Toms?"
That last click of the zoom is a surprisingly BIG jump in magnification. You can easily identify the pot plants on the window ledge inside a room.
Do you really expect me to click to download a 320GB jpeg over my puny broadband?
Do you really expect that they'd be able to afford the bandwidth costs of sending out the whole image file to everyone that clicks?
It's like google maps, it only loads the bit you need to see at one time. each time you pan or zoom it loads the next bit of view for you.
You cannot access the following Web address:
http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html
The site you requested is blocked under the following categories: Malicious Sites
You can:
Temporarily override filtering on this computer if you have an override name and password. (Note that your administrator may be notified that you've bypassed filtering.)
Use your browser's Back button or enter a different Web address to continue.
Why the fuck is this done in flash? There are plenty of decent ways of doing this kind of thing in html5 and there are better technologies that don't have that jarring effect when it switches resolutions as you zoom in.
Why in all these panos is 50% of the image sky? 160 Gigapixels of grey clouds; great.
The zoomed out images are horribly sharpened, makes it look like someone has drawn round the outlines of the buildings in marker pen. When you zoom all the way in and the image switches to the full resolution original it suddenly looks much better (although never in the same place as you were actually zooming to)
The image pans left when you drag the mouse left, sounds sensible when you write it down but this is the wrong way round. When you drag your mouse left the image should move left (pan right)
It's such a shame when all that time and effort put into constructing the thing and the viewing of the image is flawed. Perhaps they should speak to Gigapixel or Microsoft who both have technologies for doing this kind of thing that don't suck.
ROFLMOA ROFLMAO .... Are one of the LAZY devs that wont stop moaning about flash, BUT wont bother to make a decent easy to use replacement for it using 'html5' ??? or just one of those idiots that thinks it is just so easy????
If you have done ANY research, you will know 'html5' is only a very small part of the solution ... look at how they do without flash on the iphone.. it is more 'streaming video' using a remote flash server, all provided by youtube, adobe, etc... until you find a website that does not use it... this is why there is STILL plenty of help for jelly bean users to get flash loaded... :)
If the pic was out it would be so and so big. At what DPI? 72?, 200?, 300?, 600?, 1200? 2400? 4800?
It does make a difference.
The fact is I can print a photo the size of the palace with my phone. Granted, I'd be getting something ridiculously low (below 1dpi I guess), but then if I stood far enough away, It would still look 'sharp'. I wouldn't be able to move in closer to look at details though.
My initial thought was "couldn't they have waited for a sunny day" too... but thinking about it... the sun moving across the sky several times during the 4000-and-odd exposures would have created a stitching nightmare. Methinks the uniform lighting was requisite.
Could have brightened the finished montage up a bit afterwards though...
Sort of "Where's the Wally"?
I agree it is awesome, despite the way the mouse works.
I've spotted a disembodied car bonnet (probably just coming back from the future) and a flat roof that seems to have collected 20-30 footballs over the yeras.
Must stop now, more constructive things to do.
"I've spotted a disembodied car bonnet (probably just coming back from the future) ..."
This guy?
http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=107.7887&view.vlookat=42.2527&view.fov=1.9425&imarkerath=107.7887&imarkeratv=42.2527
No blurred out number plates here.
And here is the smallest car in the world:
Great pic though.
I've seen a couple of these panoramas of London now, for example there's another one from the top of the shard. Why do they always seem to pick crappy overcast weather conditions when they take them? Is there a reason for it - for example that it takes ages to take the photo, and varying amounts of cloud and smog look less stitched together than different levels of sunniness?
Also for all you Essex boys out there: -
http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-103.4595&view.vlookat=0.6078&view.fov=2.0017&imarkerath=-103.4595&imarkeratv=0.6078 #BTTowerView
The notch in the tree line is the M11 passing east of Epping and Coopersale and crowning the hill before dropping down towards Harlow. Zoom out to get a better idea of where it is in relation to other landmarks.
London seems to be a bit of a building site! Can only be good though. Amazing how crowded St. Paul's cathedral looks, considering it would have dominated the skyline in Wren's day.
The image was quite slow on my machine so only got to look at 'downtown'.
Still, a good effort though!
http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=179.1652&view.vlookat=6.2859&view.fov=0.4875&imarkerath=179.1652&imarkeratv=6.2859
Typical forward in the line-out, facing the wrong way - but that's not the worst of it. Just to the left of that, coming back onside is another of their forwards looking somewhat the worse for wear, presumably from an off-the-ball incident (someone might get cited for that).
Still worse above them - city boys, or maybe even colonials, misunderstanding that 'protective gear' in rugby normally just means a small piece of squidgy plastic in your mouth. Shame on them :)
http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-156.4974&view.vlookat=4.6758&view.fov=12.2958&imarkerath=-156.4974&imarkeratv=4.6758
Why is there a blur with straight edges on that building? Surely a cover-up! (It is obviously not a raindrop near a stitching ;-)
I dunno. According to Wikipedia the upper 10 floors are the London home of the international design and engineering firm WS Atkins PLC.
It's strange as you can't see anything due to the mirrored windows anyway. Also, if you zoom in closer, it isn't blurred anymore.
I shoot 360's panos for fun and even basic 8 shot spherical panos can take a lot of effort to look good.
I've only done a few 100Mp panos tests and these have taken some decent effort to set up. Bright sunlight is a contrast nightmare so cloudy days give much more consistent exposures and don't even go there with accounting for subject movement and depth of view/field.
Yes it's a shame there are obvious stitching artefacts but that is a serious amount of images and data to crunch. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a solid week's worth of stitching time.
This pano of the 2013 Superbowl 'only' had 220 images - http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130204/super-bowl-xlvii-gigapan/.
On a connected note, have a look at this article on shooting ultra hi res artwork - http://factum-arte.com/eng/technology/clauss.asp . The £1K camera body would have been the cheapest bit of that platform.
If they wanted to squeeze the juce right down to the pips then why did they not take the pic during the Olympics - as any one of the poor sods who trudge across London Bridge every day could tell you there was an 'Olympic Rings' display ( then the paralympcs squiggle ) suspended from the cross brace of Tower Bridge for the duration and it aint' there !
Clearly a conspiracy has been exposed , but what is the secret agenda ? Enquiring minds have to know.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
