Submitted by ChickenTeriyakiBoy1 t3_yaxlis in gadgets
ibrown39 t1_itexvza wrote
It’s hard to overstate how crazy Gigapixel images are. Here are some examples where you can explore them
120Gp image - https://petapixel.com/2021/04/27/this-120-gigapixel-photo-is-the-largest-of-new-york-city-ever-taken/
320Gp - https://360gigapixels.com/london-320-gigapixel-panorama/
cgoot27 t1_itfd66o wrote
Alright now can someone explain how one 3.2 gigapixel camera image differs from a bunch of smaller ones stitched together like these?
adaminc t1_itg8sjl wrote
It really depends on what is going on in the image, and the exposure settings.
If you are exposing something with relatively low motion, or no motion, these days there really is no difference. But if there is moderate to high motion, than you will see errors start to pop up in the stitched image, especially if the things in motion are moving across stitch edges. If the camera has a built in super-resolution mode where it uses IBIS to shift the sensor, those errors can be even more pronounced and harder to fix in post. Then on top of that, if you need to do longer exposures because the scene is dark, that makes things like motion blurs even harder to deal with because they usually don't look good, or the blur might just suddenly stop, when crossing stitch edges.
So being able to take a single monolithic image will fix most of these issues from the get go.
[deleted] t1_itfj167 wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_itg2llv wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_itg35f5 wrote
[deleted]
proxyproxyomega t1_itghhhn wrote
you take more pictures
eli7vh t1_itgpd4p wrote
Thanks for sharing! Damn those composites must have taken forever
PeterfromNY t1_itnd2e0 wrote
Thanks
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments