Hi Gen lee

Thank you for your great reply.

If I am understanding it correctly, seizing down is normally equal to loosing quality. We try to prevent loosing quality to seizing down in steps and harpen each time.

My next question is then. If I only need a pano at 450x350 pixels, would it not be better to stitch it at 2000x1000?? Then I do not have to size down and I can avoid loosing quality.

Best regards

Morten Andersen

- a newbie trying to improve

hi Gen :

great reply as always !

fatchai

Hi there Morten,

my workflow is very similar to Gen Lee with the execption that I always have a6000x3000 source image. Having done any repair/cleaning work, I'll use noise Ninja as my unsharp mask, clean up tool and save as my source image. Noise Ninja has proven it'self to be a very good tool. I'll also step down thereafter in a similar fashion mentioned previously.

My experience has been that I always get a better result from stepping down from a larger image then from useing a smaller image.

Best thing is to try both ways and see what works best for u.

PS: Great Posts here Gen Lee ;-)

Thank all of you for your comments on my posts.

For my standard real estate tours I display at 568x400. I stitch the images at 4000x2000 and save as bmp.

I size down to 2500 x 1250 then save as jpeg at 65% and see what the file size is. It is usually around 600 to 700 kb. Sometimes is is less but this depends on the image itself.

I then try 2300 x 1150 or so and use 70% to 60 % to get a target file size of less than 600 kb.

When you stitch at 2000x1000 panoweaver is actually sizing the image for you when it stitches. I prefer to size the image my self  so that I can control what happens to the image myself

I can also have a acrhived 4000x 2000 image that I can come to later and resize for QTVR or even make real small for email stuff etc.

displaying at 450 x 350 is on the larger side of things so I would use at least a 3000x1500 image to start with.

I think its better to start with all the quality you can. Unless you are shooting for full screen QTVR then stitching at 4000x2000 will do for nearly all situations.

General Lee

Though this article has some good points it also is flawed because there is no mention on "how" the images were resized. Image quality can vary greatly when resized via different procedures. 

There is plenty of good to get out of it, but don't take it as being the holy grail.

I do note that GURL has removed certain things I requested/pointed out from his original offering.

Regards, Smooth