8 ms·
80k megapixel panorama photograph of New York City (2021)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ladberg 4y agoThe loading speed is pretty impressive! I can pan and zoom around crazy fast and load the full resolution views nearly instantly.
- qwertox 4y agoIt's like Google Maps, but you're inside the earth pinned at the center and the images are projected onto the sphere. They load in tiles, so it's trivial to get it to be this fast.
- miga 4y agoNot sure if "trivial" is a good word. Sure you may publish a JS library on NPM to prove it is sooo simple?
- vhcr 4y agoLooking into the source, it looks like it uses krpano.
- qwertox 4y agoI meant trivial as in "is a solved issue" in the sense that you only have to include a library like Pannellum [0]. Features: - Equirectangular, partial, cubic, and multi-resolution panoramas - WebGL and CSS 3D based renderers - Hot spots / tours - Compass headings - Plug-in free - Framework free - Video support [0] https://github.com/mpetroff/pannellum https://github.com/mpetroff/pannellum
- newaccount2021 4y ago[dead]
- voat 4y agoIncredible. I can't believe how detailed it is.
- sys_64738 4y agoTruly stunning that I can read license plates on cars!
- simonsarris 4y agowell, it didn't take very long to find a naked guy (not PARTICULARLY revealing thankfully, in the building that says THE EPIC) there's a guy working out on a peloton or similar on his balcony. Can you find him?! This would be really neat to do again in the summer, when presumably(?) the roof decks are full of people. The rooflines are pretty desolate looking right now.
- simpleintheory 4y ago> do again in the summer I'm pretty sure EarthCam does this daily.
- SamBam 4y agoThis could be the world's biggest Where's Waldo game. Someone should dress as him the next time this takes a photo.
- coreyp_1 4y agoAnd here I was, just wasting my time looking at the bolts in the building (180 degrees from the opening shot).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- xyzelement 4y agoSo funny, I saw that dude right away and came here to post about that.
- steffen84 4y agoI found a telescope in the building, and after your suggestion, I observed the guy.
- karpour 4y agoDang, you beat me to it, I was just about to post about the naked guy I found ;)
- kuprel 4y agoApparently the camera can stream live video: https://www.earthcam.net/products/gigapixelcamx80.php https://www.earthcam.net/products/gigapixelcamx80.php There would probably be some privacy issues with streaming a city live though
- geepytee 4y agoWould love to know how much it costs
- vhcr 4y ago> The GigapixelCam X80 is $24,995 as fitted, but if a client does not need a robotic version, those are less expensive. EarthCam’s line starts at $1,900 for a time-lapse camera with solar power and goes up from there. https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is-the-largest-of-new-york-city-ever-taken/ https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is...
- chakintosh 4y agoPrice seems cheap compared to what can be done with it especially in homeland security applications
- kristopolous 4y agoI don't really understand the use case. I feel like if I'd be a potential buyer of such a camera I'd also be in the position to install many cameras in many places and get a better perspective. What's this give you? Passive iris scanning at a distance maybe? An ability to read people's phone screens? What's the problem this is solving?
- Forgeties79 4y agoIt’s a snapshot of a moment of time. I think we all agree it’s useful to have photos of different places from different eras, right? I mean at its most fundamental level, this is a future historical document. It’s easy to imagine why that is “useful” or “what problems it solves.”
- georgeg23 4y agoCould just as well be the view from a spy balloon https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a38005873/pentagon-balloons-strattolite/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a38005873...
- loloquwowndueo 4y ago80k megapixel = 80 gigapixel?
- georgeg23 4y agoYes
- sva_ 4y ago[flagged]
- consumer451 4y agoWelp, that's a first for me on this website.
- testfrequency 4y agoGenuinely curious what was said. They had +5 it appears…which is even more concerning..
- consumer451 4y agoSorry to disappoint you but: rickroll
- account42 4y agoYou can enable showdead in your user settings if you want to see [dead] comments.
- EGreg 4y agoI didn’t see him but someone who looks like Rick Astley was performing on stage there
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- soultrees 4y agoYeah not cool here. Leave that for Reddit.
- sva_ 4y agoYou're not wrong. But these kind of reposts should be held to the same standard.
- xwdv 4y agoDidn’t think this was going to be too impressive. Then I started zooming, and realized how many people I could spy on in their windows and in the streets.
- geenew 4y agoStill looks kinda blurry when you zoom in all the way
- heartbreak 4y agoDepending on the distance, you’re likely seeing atmospheric distortion from stuff like heat shimmer.
- geenew 4y agoI was implying it would be good to have a zoom limit so the image is sharp at max zoom
- rhaway84773 4y agoAll the technicalities aside, this is beautiful.
- JackFr 4y agoVery impressive but it’s just south of 34th Street, so I can’t look in my own window.
- skytbest 4y agoCrazy thing is that this is like only half of New York City, south of 34th street. Basically all of midtown is north of this with some of the most impressive buildings and density. Nevermind uptown, the Bronx, and Queens. Unless I'm missing someway to look north.
- antipaul 4y ago"This is like only half of Manhattan, one of 5 city boroughs" would be more accurate Though to be fair, most people _do_ associate Manhattan with NYC
- rcme 4y agoWhen you’re in Brooklyn, you still say “going in to the city” to mean Manhattan.
- abletonlive 4y agoI live in Brooklyn and I just say I'm going to Manhattan if I am going to Manhattan.
- emeril 4y agohaving lived in queens for long time, I agree, I usually would say Manhattan though, tbh, I'd sometimes make fun of someone and just say "the big city" when they are reluctant to go into manhattan for whatever reason
- humanizersequel 4y agoLive in Brooklyn, can confirm. I don't like it, but this is how people talk about Manhattan.
- plondon514 4y agoBorn and raised in Manhattan. Live in Brooklyn. When I’m returning home I say I’m “going back to the city”. When I’m in Brooklyn going to Manhattan I say “going into the city”.
- minkzilla 4y agoThe near stuff is incredibly detailed as well! Look backwards at the building the photo is taken from and you can read labels on the bolts and see flakes of rust on the grate below.
- muglug 4y agoNeeds a (2021) label. Taken in early March 2021, judging by the movies playing at the IFC.
- h11h 4y agoIt's actually a 120 gigapixel image. It was taken with a 61 megapixel Sony a7R IV and Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G lens with a robotic housing. https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is-the-largest-of-new-york-city-ever-taken/ https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is...
- rakkhi 4y agoAnywhere to download the original image? Be a cool wallpaper :)
- account42 4y agoHow many pixels a stitched panorama has is not as clear cut I guess. Just because you stitch a panorama at a certain size does not mean that you actually have information for that much resolution - and it's hard to say what size you should stitch at since, for any notrivial panorama, how many source pixels contribute to an area in the output will vary greatly depending on where on the panorama you are looking at due to the nonlinear transforms involved. E.g. stiching an equirectangular projection from ~rectilinear source images will give you much more resolution at the center line compared to the top/bottom, which are just one point stretched across the whole width (for a panorama covering the whole 180 vertical angles). Then there is also the question of what the source resoltion actually is - most commonly the quoted resolution of a camera (i.e. the "Megapixels" on the maketing material) is usually the number of sensor "pixels" but each of those is only a single color so the resulting image won't really have that many RGB pixels of information even if it is developed at that resolution - the will be quite a bit filled in by interpolation. Then there is resolution loss from suboptimal focus due to needing to cover a large distance range, lens imperfections or just the air when things are far enough away. So while the resulting image might have 120 000 000 000 pixels, it might not actually have more than 80 000 000 000 pixels worth of information. That's not to say it isn't impressive, just trying to point out that a simple gigapixel number might not actually say what you might think.
- ydnaclementine 4y agoCrazy you're able to see Metlife Stadium and make out planes at EWR
- avodonosov 4y agoSome kind of barrels on almost every roof. What are those?
- heartbreak 4y agoWater tanks
- skytbest 4y agoWater tanks to supply the buildings
- cute_boi 4y agohmm why do they need water tanks? I thought city supplies the water etc.. Or they are only required for large buildings because of pressure?
- walrus01 4y agoNYC underground water pipes are very old and run at low pressure. Buildings above a certain height need to pump water to roof and then gravity feed it. If you search NYC water tanks on YouTube there are some good documentaries of the companies that build them.
- windthrown 4y agoThe latter. These tanks are still supplied by the municipal water system but storing it in the tanks allow for consistent water pressure in tall buildings.
- windthrown 4y agoThose are water tanks/towers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooftop_water_tower https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooftop_water_tower https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/27/nyregion/inside-citys-water-tanks-layers-of-neglect.html?unlocked_article_code=_t_g1jxcu56OBisV8jHUIk3I9UvJB_nFc5duTY3aK_c9aWl0bwxqbUC89QS5pV64CSPdG5mL1QqgP-ka_3uyjq1GDYZketipliHgMbvlw7lip9FZ6GADeHDDJakko4k3FbbpqQtyiBjOvfUpEjLC2IhUPrwAQ8afOUVxGxeMprqJIePv56R0NtYZ8aPvoEER9FL0RjXovwzwuDqTJsSnHB84QEWS9cg-5I7sV4jhqSSORbMNSnnAVdjeaTWMgxV3lY9goDKX4DnYSpK5HI6SdBLsMZ1kpL1EPDfKUaUSd_lpiYIn_LjM0NTOSPmm8yim7HuTe4hYB1LVbhIHS6I-Yy__oTFFl8czCoSwL3WLSK4EhGribQ https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/27/nyregion/inside-citys-wat...
- segmondy 4y agoI wonder how long it took? If it's fast, it would be scary, imagine taking picture of crowds...
- djtriptych 4y agoI'd guess 10 minutes up to an hour on modern hardware, say a new mac studio. That would be in lightroom - I'm guessing they're using optimized software for this though. Taking the actual pictures takes at least couple minutes. The Sony A1 can take 50mp shots at 20 fps - pretty amazing. That's (conveniently) 1 gigapixel per second. So minimum 2 minutes to capture this entire image. Add at least a second between shots for the robotic housing and we're talking 4+ minutes. Could certainly be used to capture most of the faces in a huge crowd.
- lupka 4y agoThey do crowd shots like this quite a bit at sporting events and whatnot. I am in this one haha: http://gigapixel.panoramas.com/superbowl/2013/ http://gigapixel.panoramas.com/superbowl/2013/
- vhcr 4y ago“This photo was probably created over several weeks, but that being said we could run a simple version where it runs 77 photos at 70mm to create a 2.6 gigapixel photo and that takes 15 minutes,” Cury explains. https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is-the-largest-of-new-york-city-ever-taken/ https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is...
- Jamie9912 4y agoYou should add a cache rule for those image tiles
- hakimking 4y agoWow - this is crazy.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bentobean 4y agoAm I the only one who found the two naked people?
- fIREpOK 4y agoCan you find Waldo?
- orangepurple 4y agoSomeone walked on that completely rusted out unpainted metal platform to install and remove the camera
- corbulo 4y agoYou can see the text on the bolt head behind the camera. Amazing
- mojomark 4y agoHoly cow - I literally was just about to make this same exact comment. I was like, that's pretty incredible resolution on the rust on the steel grating. Wait, what about this bolt over here - and bam! I can see the knicks on the flathead cut surface. Pretty amazing.
- corbulo 4y agomakes you think about how much information hits our eyes vs how much we perceive
- Grum9 4y agoSomeone posted something like this here years back I remember, 195 gigapixel, but for Shanghai. http://pf.bigpixel.cn/zh-CN/pano/771906131130847232.html http://pf.bigpixel.cn/zh-CN/pano/771906131130847232.html https://www.dpreview.com/news/1645435845/chinese-company-captures-incredibly-detailed-195-gigapixel-360-degree-panorama-of-shanghai https://www.dpreview.com/news/1645435845/chinese-company-cap...
- mikae1 4y agoDezoomify → https://github.com/lovasoa/dezoomify https://github.com/lovasoa/dezoomify
- plastic3169 4y agoI know megapixels are used when discussing cameras but I find the unit hard to understand. It would be so much more informative to know the resolution of the image in pixels.
- mejutoco 4y agoEven megapixels are not a guarantee (since the camera might do some processing) but at least they relate to the resolution _of the sensor_. It is a bit like the nanometer nodes of the cpu processes vs using the surface size of the final cpu.
- account42 4y agos/the camera might do some processing/the camera is almost always doing processing and only captures ¼ of the information content compared to what its marketed resolution implies/ That is, the sensor will have that many "pixels", but each sensor pixel only captures a single color and the rest is interpolated.
- mejutoco 4y agoAgree. A consumer camera might advertise too many megapixels, while more professional cameras, like medium format cameras (the ones used for architecture, for instance) do not distort it so much. In this, it is like the node size. It is not directly comparable but gives a reference to talk about.
- Dalewyn 4y agoThe only thing you need to understand is: Bigger Is Better Resolution. The unit itself is basically hogwash at this point, not unlike TDP, silicon process nodes, processor clock speeds, and USB.
- account42 4y agoWhat you really want to know is the information content (in the information theory sense) of the image. The number of pixels is somewhat arbitrary depending on the processing involved - and especially for nonlinear projections like used here, there is no definite answer on how many pixels it should have beyond an upper and lower bound.
- geiser 4y agoAnyone seeing the nude guy at epic.com building?
- sgt 4y agoWhat are all those huge cylinders on the rooftops? Each one has a brown cone on top. I see hundreds of them. Pressurized water?
- ellsthrow 4y agoWater tanks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a9y-Vv1E78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a9y-Vv1E78
- wernerzeigler2 4y agoNot quite as astounding a vision as Lebbus Woods', but not bad. https://lebbeuswoods.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/lower-manhattan-revisited/ https://lebbeuswoods.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/lower-manhatta...
- chakintosh 4y agoFor some reason I spent the past 15 minutes trying to find the building where MKBHD Studio is.
- sandworm101 4y agoWow. Stable diffusion is progressing exponentially. What prompts and/or model was used for to generate this? (Prove me wrong.)
- KineticLensman 4y ago> Wow. Stable diffusion is progressing exponentially. What prompts and/or model was used for to generate this? (Prove me wrong.) When you zoom in, the pedestrians have the right number of fingers.
- miga 4y agoI wish the web page also took care of aspect ratio. Good for viewing at 8k after you correct aspect ratio by browser window resizing.
- lloydatkinson 4y agoIt’s a shame they took it from the side of a building rather than the top…
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- gullywhumper 4y agoIf you look to the right, just in front of the Eugene (one of the newer Hudson Yards high rise buildings) the top part of the crane is split. There have to be other similar examples throughout the photo.