3 ms·
There's a difference. For this 111GP image there was taken 9750 images. Those images were then merged together to a single image using Autopano Giga and then sp
by kristofferR 16y ago
There's a difference. For this 111GP image there was taken 9750 images. Those images were then merged together to a single image using Autopano Giga and then split for the ease of presentation. Google's satelite photography on the other hand has never been merged into one huge image.
- ghshephard 16y agoI'm with the OP. These images have not been merged together to form a single image. There is no 111 Gigapixel image out there that represents this picture. As you zoom in, you hit a different tile-layer.
- singlow 16y agoMaybe the fact that this "single photo" is taken from a single vantage point makes it a record?
- kristofferR 16y agoWell, turns out I wasn't entirely correct for this picture. They rendered it to three bigass images: http://translate.google.es/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sevilla111.com%2Fcomosehizo.htm&sl=es&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8 http://translate.google.es/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sevi... For some of the other massive Gigapixel photographs I've seen they've rendered it down to only one image file: http://70gigapixel.cloudapp.net/index_en.html#3 http://70gigapixel.cloudapp.net/index_en.html#3
- jerf 16y ago"Google's satelite photography on the other hand has never been merged into one huge image." [citation needed] How do you know that? What are the odds someone in their organization has done that for kicks at some point? Or anybody else with a similar dataset.
- kristofferR 16y agoTrue, but records aren't considered records if they're kept secret. Even if I could hold my breath for 25 minutes, Stig Severinsen would be considered as the best in the world at holding his breath until I publicly demonstrated that I could beat his time.