| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/03/2003 10:06:52 AM · #26 |
| Thx Kirbic - I think I get what you're saying - just hard for me to wrap my mind around this technology sometimes. Theoretically, a gp camera using the same technique would be commensurately higher resolution, if you had a processor large enough to handle the job. But, a single comparable picture taken with the same gp camera could not possibly include the detail captured in the lower mp camera's individual shots. |
|
|
|
12/03/2003 02:11:05 PM · #27 |
You really only need those extra pixels if you want to create larger, high resolution prints. However, you can't pack that many pixels on todays sensors, and even if you could the pixel density would be so high as to render airy disks visible at even the smallest apertures. For example, with a 36x24mm sensor and 1G in pixels (roughly), your 300dpi print size of 140x93 inches will render airy disks visible below f/1.8 (you can just get f/1.8 @ 200ppi though). Even large format only gets you f/4 @ 300ppi (f/7.1 @ 200dpi); your print size changes but that's generally the point.
For very large prints (measured in feet) and very close viewing distances (approx 10"), you definitely want to use stitching. Otherwise, they better start making really, really big sensors. |
|
|
|
12/03/2003 03:57:21 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
...For very large prints (measured in feet) and very close viewing distances (approx 10"), you definitely want to use stitching. Otherwise, they better start making really, really big sensors. |
A silly thought exercise: if you have a 10µm pixel pitch (similar to today's DSLRs) and an 8"x10" sensor, that's still only 0.5Gpx!! And a single 8"x10" sensor won't quite fit on a 300mm silicon wafer... so much for manufacturing!
Yeh, stitching.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2003 03:28:30 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
And if you htink a gigapixel is big...//navigatela.lacity.org/samples/start/
There's an 82 gigapixel image of Southern California; it does need a plugin to view it though... |
Nice find, i was able to find my house, my school and some of my friens houses. The picture is fairly old tho, i found places that since then have been built up
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 09:14:00 PM · #30 |
Check out this 2.5 Gigapixel Image!!Truly amazing,a little fat for DPC entry,LOL
2.5G
The Image
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 21:29:04. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 09:23:19 PM · #31 |
The following isn't truly a digital camera, but the project is very intriguing and the pictures are incredible.
//www.gigapxl.org/gallery.htm
|
|
|
|
11/18/2004 12:31:56 AM · #32 |
You all seem to be impressed by big images. I however am more impressed by big cameras.
Check out this 1400 lb bad boy. |
|
|
|
11/18/2004 01:15:37 AM · #33 |
I had one like that but the neck strap kept breaking :p
t
|
|
|
|
11/18/2004 08:37:53 AM · #34 |
Crossposting, since there are two similar threads at the same time: this one and the !!! 2.5 Billion Pixel Digital Photograph, 6GBs !!!
|
|
|
|
11/18/2004 09:20:31 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by timj351:
I had one like that but the neck strap kept breaking :p
t |
How many megapixels is that camera, anyway? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/14/2025 11:27:31 AM EDT.
