|
Both work fine... on my Broadband XP SP2 Centrino 2,1 with good Graffic card and 1GB RAM.
So... this means that pretty much everything will work... I must admit though that the 200 and 300 kb images are both good... just that 300 kb takes more time to load... (for those with poor connection. The whole point for vr tours is that they deliver interactive content over the web. If you have large file sizes... u'll lock out a large part of the visitors. Personly I try and keep my image sizes down to 120kb and only really up the kb for particularly great images.
Image quality will be improved with a better camera. I used to use the cp990 and then cp4500 and have switched to the Canon 20D Sig 8mm. The amount of detail I can capture is amazing. Also I can work in RAW... this means I don'tr have to worry about white balance and that the images aren't captured in jpg, which compresses the image to start with. I also don't have any form of sharpening on the camera. So by having a large initial image, stiching it to 4000x2000 running it through noise ninja (great great tool... which improves the overall image no end) resizing down to 1400x700 and adding some unsharpen (40%) I hen am able to take the file size down to around 120 kb for good quality pano instead of needing around 180kb on my previous set up.
Have a look at this. Most of the images were taken with a cp4500 FC-E8 combo. I retook some of the panos on Sunday. The 3 images of the bowling alley were taken with the new set-up. (they're the 3 lowest ones in the green and yellow areas). Now these are just quick off the cuff panos. 3shots per 90 & only weigh in at around 120kb. My window size is 300x400. Anything much larger can lead to judder as has been mentioned.
-------------
If I only had an hour to chop down a tree... I'd spend 45 mins sharpening the axe.
|
All Forums
Tourweaver
Topic: virtual tour skips??
