 |
| View it properly on Google Plus |
I plan to post a more full review of that in the coming week or so, but for now I wanted to give a short review of one of the much talked about gimmicky features... Photosphere
Having seen this feature unveiled and examples posted on Google Plus I had a mixture of feelings and expectations.
On the one hand I have always somewhat disapproved of new OS features that amount to nothing more than a new app (we can download apps already guys!), on the other hand tying features directly into the OS does tend to make them run better and be well supported.
In addition the results I have seen so far have been rather mixed. Some are stunning panos - nearly flawless - that create the gorgeous immersive experience that Google were clearly aiming for; others have been a total mess with bad joins, exposure issues and black bits missing from the top and bottom.
In addition the results I have seen so far have been rather mixed. Some are stunning panos - nearly flawless - that create the gorgeous immersive experience that Google were clearly aiming for; others have been a total mess with bad joins, exposure issues and black bits missing from the top and bottom.
The only way to tell if these are down to user errors, patchy software, or some other problem is to try it for yourself. So yesterday with a small amount of hopefulness I took a gentle lunchtime stroll to test out the sphere.
My experience was pleasing in the main: the process of creating the full sphere was really easy and certainly didn't take as long as it might with a different UI.
This had clearly been well thought out.
This had clearly been well thought out.
The process involves opening the camera app and selecting the Photosphere mode. Once there you just line up the camera horizontally so the blue dot is in the middle of the frame. Once it has taken a second or two to capture that image you can pan around the three dimensional plane finding the blue dots and lining up to capture the images that make up the sphere. Happily the is no need to press the shutter button during this process, just line up and as soon as you do the frame is captured.
In fact if you do this one horizontal plane at a time the capture rate can be very fast and you can spin around capturing like lightning.
The dots may seen a little randomly laid out at first, but once you've got the horizontals first idea it's clear to see that they are laid out in 5 circles, which I could best describe as the equator, the Tropics and the Poles.
In fact if you do this one horizontal plane at a time the capture rate can be very fast and you can spin around capturing like lightning.
The dots may seen a little randomly laid out at first, but once you've got the horizontals first idea it's clear to see that they are laid out in 5 circles, which I could best describe as the equator, the Tropics and the Poles.
I span around 5 times (looking something of a twit) and had captured my first Photosphere in less than a minute.
After it had finished stitching (another minute) I took a look and then proudly posted it on Google Plus, where anyone with a decent browser (i.e. Firefox or Google Chrome - IE8 is a little bit buggy) can take a look at it in 'Street View'-like fashion. My colleagues seemed generally complimentary, especially after hearing it was my first attempt and that it took a minute or less to do.
After it had finished stitching (another minute) I took a look and then proudly posted it on Google Plus, where anyone with a decent browser (i.e. Firefox or Google Chrome - IE8 is a little bit buggy) can take a look at it in 'Street View'-like fashion. My colleagues seemed generally complimentary, especially after hearing it was my first attempt and that it took a minute or less to do.
I had been a little surprised when I got to the Poles on my first picture that it didn't seem to let me fill in the top and bottom. There were no additional blue dots that I could see, but I thought perhaps that was something that would be corrected in the stitching process.
After that was finished I was disappointed that this wasn't the case. Perhaps this was just an error in the GNex build of 4.2? I had seen 'complete' photospheres before online, so that seemed the most likely option...
After that was finished I was disappointed that this wasn't the case. Perhaps this was just an error in the GNex build of 4.2? I had seen 'complete' photospheres before online, so that seemed the most likely option...
The stitching worked fine for me, buy I'd already realised how to do a good job on that. Simple geometry really, rotate the camera without moving it too much in any other direction. Or rather: move yourself around the camera, not the camera around yourself.
The other key factor is the distance of the focal objects - the closer they are the more the 'camera location' issues wok affect the stitching. This is an issue clear to anyone who has ever tried stitching photos by hand in Photoshop... (Yep, guilty there!)
The other key factor is the distance of the focal objects - the closer they are the more the 'camera location' issues wok affect the stitching. This is an issue clear to anyone who has ever tried stitching photos by hand in Photoshop... (Yep, guilty there!)
So in short keep the camera still if doing large distant panoramas, and keep it seriously glued to the spot if doing a Photosphere inside a room!
And then I had a thought...
Q: Why are there black circles in my panorama?
A: You're holding it wrong ;)
Lying in bed last night the differentiating factor suddenly hit me: Why are there some Nexus 4 photospheres on Google Plus with black 'Poles', and GNex ones that are complete?
Of course, there might be a difference when taking in portrait or landscape?!
So before breakfast I gave it a go. The results are badly stitched because I did it fast without holding the camera very still, but it proved my point. Holding the phone on landscape while snapping will produce the black Poles, while using it in portrait completes the job, stitching the whole thing. (With the sometimes exception of a small black blob by your foot)
 |
| photosphere missing a bit on top in landscape |
 |
| photosphere completed in portrait |
I checked the process and in landscape they take the following:
12x equator, 9x Tropics (in each) and 7x Poles (each), totalling 44 images
Whereas in portrait: 16x equator, 11x Tropics and 6x Poles, totalling 50
(Just in case you fancy it the rushed photospheres are here for comparison: Portrait and Landscape)
(Just in case you fancy it the rushed photospheres are here for comparison: Portrait and Landscape)
My advice is therefore to always hold the camera in portrait when photosphere-ing, so you get the whole image.
If you are only wanting a 360 panorama and don't care about the Poles then using landscape orientation might be a fraction quicker, as you don't need to line up so many blue dots, but you still have to turn the full circle so it's probably a negligible difference.
If you are only wanting a 360 panorama and don't care about the Poles then using landscape orientation might be a fraction quicker, as you don't need to line up so many blue dots, but you still have to turn the full circle so it's probably a negligible difference.
Tiny Planet
One final note is the Tiny Planet option, which is a different way to process the Photosphere images.
In essence it pops the 'South Pole' images in the centre and bends the rest around, so that outdoor photos create a globe-style rendering in a square JPEG.
My favourite renderings are actually the indoor images, that often don't stitch well in Photosphere mode, but look great in Tiny Planet, kinda like a Fisheye security camera image.
 |
| My Outdoor photo as a Tiny Planet |
My favourite renderings are actually the indoor images, that often don't stitch well in Photosphere mode, but look great in Tiny Planet, kinda like a Fisheye security camera image.
Take a look.
 |
| Kitchen Security image? What are those kitties up to? |
I like these piccies. The blue sky panorama and mini globe are gorgeous and cute, and the kitchen one is fun. You can write about anything and make it conversational and understandable, even techy stuff. Xxxx
ReplyDelete