Panorama 360 ° 2 layers with AutoPano

[Bucho]

While trying to make a 360/180 interactive pano, I tried the programs listed above with poor results with stitching, etc. I tried Panorama Studio Pro and it created great results. My problem is determining how to upload it to here, facebook, or anywhere else. I did learn that if I copy the created files AND all of the image files to another location then the panostudioviewer works. I am new to these and thought that when the 360/180 interactive was created all I would need to do is upload the rendered image. I guess I was wrong ...

Many of us are starting out in the field of panorama.
So that your notions are more asserted, you would have to upload your 16 pictures somewhere on a server and provide to us the download link ... for my part, I would understand better what you are trying to have.
The fact that you did not use the panorama program of the H could pose no difficulty, according to how you would have taken the pictures.

 

[mikkis123]

Autopano giga works perfectly, 2 layer panorama mode and auto settings -> Mikkeli 360° kuva. 4.12.2016, pakkasta -15°C - Etelä-Savon ilmakuva | Facebook

 

[John Dube]

Dropbox - 360 180 Pano Test

This Dropbox Shared link will show the files for my 360/180 Interactive Pano. Select the HTML file to load the pano. Please let me know if this works. I am now learning both the Pano and Dropbox features. Thanks for any input.

Also, There is no post work on this. I want to learn the process first, then work on post processing.

 

[Bucho]

Dropbox - 360 180 Pano Test
This Dropbox Shared link will show the files for my 360/180 Interactive Pano. Select the HTML file to load the pano. Please let me know if this works. I am now learning both the Pano and Dropbox features. Thanks for any input.
Also, There is no post work on this. I want to learn the process first, then work on post processing.

I can download only your first Jpg!

 

[scoyle]

I just tried the unregistered version of PanoramaStudio Pro 3 and it worked flawlessly with default parameters. It has an option to create the html to publish directly from a website. Here is a quick result with the watermark (unregistered). It is considerably less expensive than Autopana Giga.

http://ccrcc.info/panorama/Panorama1.html

 

[John Dube]

I just tried the unregistered version of PanoramaStudio Pro 3 and it worked flawlessly with default parameters. It has an option to create the html to publish directly from a website. Here is a quick result with the watermark (unregistered). It is considerably less expensive than Autopana Giga.

http://ccrcc.info/panorama/Panorama1.html[/QUOTE

Nice Pano and photos.
I don't have a web site of my own. I am trying to figure out how to share it on a facebook or on a group such as this. Have you done this yet?

 

[John Dube]

I just tried the unregistered version of PanoramaStudio Pro 3 and it worked flawlessly with default parameters. It has an option to create the html to publish directly from a website. Here is a quick result with the watermark (unregistered). It is considerably less expensive than Autopana Giga.

http://ccrcc.info/panorama/Panorama1.html

What settings are you using for your photos, or are you cleaning them up in post?

 

[scoyle]

What settings are you using for your photos, or are you cleaning them up in post?

These are default settings on the photos. No post processing either. They look washed-out if you ask me so a big area of improvement for me.

 

[Bucho]

I just tried the unregistered version of PanoramaStudio Pro 3 and it worked flawlessly with default parameters. It has an option to create the html to publish directly from a website. Here is a quick result with the watermark (unregistered). It is considerably less expensive than Autopana Giga.
http://ccrcc.info/panorama/Panorama1.html

Good information, thanks!
About prices (today) :
- PanoramaStudio 3 Pro: 69,90 €
- AutoPano:
. Pro: 74,25 €
. Giga: 149,25 €

I will take the time to to assess the main differences in functionality between versions of these three softwares.

 

[Bucho]

I tried PanoramaStudio 3 Pro which also has very well rendered my images of the cemetery.

After querying the software editors, I bring the following information:
- AutoPano does not include a viewer of 3D interactive panoramas, it is necessary to buy in addition Panotour which is worth 74.25 €;
- PanoramaStudio 3 Pro incorporates a 3D panorama viewer (called "PanoramaStudioViewer") that a "for-profit" company (neither education nor government) can use for only 30 days, after this time you must buy a PanoramaStudioViewer license for +49 € per website.

 

[Pedwergos]

Fabulous work Bucho. Well done for persevering and thanks for sharing!

 

[Bucho]

Fabulous work Bucho. Well done for persevering and thanks for sharing!

Thank you very much Pedwergos, I appreciate of course your compliments (I do not receive often, so warm!).

To all, here is what my panorama "Cemetery" is like (the photo will illustrate the cover of a memoir on the personalities of the past who lived in my village, prepared by the municipal council):
Le cimetière de Saint-Cyr | Visite virtuelle

More delightful, here is another panorama showing the rock garden that the last hermit inhabiting the place, built with his hands from 1878 to 1910, to travel his own "way to Jerusalem" :
Drone témoin | L'Ermitage de Saint-Cyr | Visite virtuelle
This panorama will illustrate brochures to collect donations for the restoration and conservation of this wonder.

The two interactive views were carried out in the following way:
- panorama process 2 layers, Typhoon H RealSense Pro, ND8 filter,
- rendered Jpeg: Autopano Giga 4.2;
- interactive 3D view: Panotour 2.5

 

[SoCalDroner]

The Cemetery panorama 360 is excellent. It seems very natural and immersive as you move around. The Rock garden seems is very distorted and unnatural.

When I was viewing the Cemetery, I zoomed in and wanted to explore all of the different areas. When I was viewing the rock garden, I had no desire to continue viewing it because of the distorted view.

Did you use a different technique for each?

 

[Bucho]

The Cemetery panorama 360 is excellent. The Rock garden seems is very distorted and unnatural ... Did you use a different technique for each?

Thank you SoCalDroner for your appreciations, imagine that I approve them, these are my first two experiences!

I have absolutely no varied the techniques between the shots, moreover it took only one hour to go from one site to another.
There was also no change in the treatment by Autopano and Panotour.

Here's how I could try to explain the distortion effect:
- in the case of the cemetery the view goes far : the horizon is in its place!
- in the case of the rock garden, the centers of interest were at different altitudes (height: the statue, the crosses, the two towers ; much lower: the roof of the church, the road to Jerusalem); that is why I parked the drone at an altitude that allows to have the detail of the different levels of centers of interest.
Then the distortion might come from the fact that these centers of interest are very close to the camera, I should probably have taken more height! This may have caused problems to the CGO3 +.

 

[scoyle]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before. A FEATURE I would love to see from Yuneec is the ability to save each series of panorama images in their own folder on the microSD card. Reduces clutter and enhances organization.

 

[Bucho]

... A FEATURE I would love to see from Yuneec is the ability to save each series of panorama images in their own folder on the microSD card.

Is not it enough to remember that each layer is the subject of 9 photos?

I always wonder who is responsible for the distortion, in the interactive view The Hermitage of Saint-Cyr | Virtual tour: Panotour? The CGO3 + camera? The insufficient altitude of the drone? Targets photographed too close to the camera?

 

[scoyle]

Ummmm... Each layer is 8 photos. then 2 at the bottom. So yes, maybe not enough.

 

[Bucho]

Ummmm... Each layer is 8 photos. then 2 at the bottom. So yes, maybe not enough.

You're right, for each layer the Typhoon should take 8 photos on 360 ° then 2 photos of the ground, ... that's what I wanted to write of course, thank you.
...
But I do not understand why I only finded 18 photos in the SDCARD!
18 photos in .dng and 18 photos in .jpg: instead of 20 pictures, it is a mystery ... the reality does not correspond to what was expected, it will be a case if same observation after my next panoramas.
Anybody can explain, 18 instead of 20?

 

[scoyle]

You're right, for each layer the Typhoon should take 8 photos on 360 ° then 2 photos of the ground, ... that's what I wanted to write of course, thank you.
...
But I do not understand why I only finded 18 photos in the SDCARD!
18 photos in .dng and 18 photos in .jpg: instead of 20 pictures, it is a mystery ... the reality does not correspond to what was expected, it will be a case if same observation after my next panoramas.
Anybody can explain, 18 instead of 20?

A single layer is 8 photos. A dual layer is a layer 8 photos high, 8 photos lower, and 2 photos down so 18 in total is correct.

 

[Irwin]

You're right, for each layer the Typhoon should take 8 photos on 360 ° then 2 photos of the ground, ... that's what I wanted to write of course, thank you.
...
But I do not understand why I only finded 18 photos in the SDCARD!
18 photos in .dng and 18 photos in .jpg: instead of 20 pictures, it is a mystery ... the reality does not correspond to what was expected, it will be a case if same observation after my next panoramas.
Anybody can explain, 18 instead of 20?

8+8+2=18