Amazing 360x180 P3P Panoramic from 500ft above my house

Joined
Jul 15, 2015
Messages
36
Reaction score
24
Age
50
-- UPDATE 4 --

Moved my Pano links (and added a couple of new ones):

University of Delaware Football Stadium - new
William Cooke Elementary School - new
The Italian Palace 500 ft up
The Italian Palace 1,600 ft up
Wilmington Riverfront
Piedmont Baseball Field


-- UPDATE 3 --

Pano of Wilmington Delaware Riverfront

Wilmington Delaware Riverfront


Videos I also took here flying over the city:

-- UPDATE 2 --

I did a third in this "series" now using only about 160 regular 4,000 x 3,000 photos. I agree that the photos look better and its much easier than doing video and then extracting the frames.

The Italian Palace


-- UPDATE --


Had a break in the weather here so based on suggestions from this thread I went up again and did a "redo" using only stills snapped with the camera instead of taking video and extracting the frames. I went a little crazy taking a couple hundred photos but was easy.

New version using 4,000 x 3,000 pixel camera shots
http://theitalianpalace.com/tipv2/tip360v2.htm

I am not going to give my opinion on which one I think looks better - want to see what everyone thinks. I am convinced however we need an "app for that" via the API to do this automatically.

Original version using 3840 x 2160 extracted movie frames
http://theitalianpalace.com/tip360.htm

Interesting observation - the final jpg for the new version is roughly the same size as the original despite the fact that the camera only pics are higher resolution each.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its like Google earth - you can move & zoom with the mouse. Full screen (upper right control) is awesome. I used PTGui to create the pano itself.

The web server is running from my basement and I only have a limited upstream pipe. There is about 20MB of data to transfer so please be gentle :). From my LAN its perfectly fluid & even looks great on my phone. If this thread generates interest and someone wants to re-host this for me somewhere it would be appreciated and I can get you the files.

How I did it:
1 - Flew up to 500ft
2 - Turned the camera all the way up.
3 - Started the video and SLOWLY turned the bird clockwise 360 degrees with ONLY the left stick being careful NOT to change vertical position. About 60 seconds to pan stopping where I started. Then stopped the video.
4 - Turned the camera down a bit and redid step 3. Again careful not to change or move the P3 itself up or down, idea is to only rotate clockwise in place.
5 - Moved the camera down again and again repeating above until the last rotation was with the camera pointed all the way down.
6 - I then had ten 4K videos. Landed the bird and went inside for the fun part.
7 - Next I had to extract one frame a second from each of the ten videos. I renamed the videos sequentially to 1.mov, etc. I then used ffmpeg with this command line: ffmpeg -i e:\in\1.mov -vf fps=1 e:\out\1out%d.png repeating ten times changing the input and output file names.
8 - I ended up with 509 5-8mb files totaling 7.57gb.
9 - I settled on trying PTGui after doing some generic Google searches on Panoramics and watching a couple of youtube videos.
10 - I basically used the defaults in the software. I first exported it as a 20mb JPG and also as a MOV that quicktime could view. I then realized that PTGui had an export to HTML option.
11 - TIP - PTGui won't be able to get the metadata from the exported png frames so when you first load the files it will want some info. When asked I told it my focal length was 3.61 with a multiplier of 5.54. After you load the images hit the advanced button and select Optimizer and hit the Optimizer button at the bottom. It will further correct these settings. Then just hit the create panorama button.

The program ran for about 45 minutes and chewed up 16gb of RAM. I never even though it was going to finish without blowing up. Much to my surprise it turned out way better than I had even imagined. Amazing that this small camera 500ft up in the air pointed in all directions creates as much detail as it does even with zooming. I can't wait to do something like this much closer to the ground & around something more interesting

DOM

P.S.

Was just thinking - isn't there an obvious SDK opportunity here? Does anyone know if with the new SDK a "script" could be written to move the P3 to a particular spot & altitude, position the gimbal, take a series or burst of pictures while rotating, move the gimbal, down, repeat, etc. That would be exactly what I did but would use the higher res stills and be precisely controlled for an exact overlap of pics. Also would be incredibly efficient in terms of time and number of shots. Heck I could see with such automation the shots necessary to do what I did but better be performed in less than a minute.

Heck, people would PAY for an app that did this....
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 3, 2015
Messages
507
Reaction score
202
Location
Point Washington, FL.
That's pretty awesome!
 

GadgetGuy

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,161
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
575
Reaction score
157
Location
Canberra Australia
That's above your house? Wow, you've installed quite a pool in your backyard :)
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2015
Messages
36
Reaction score
24
Age
50
LOL - its just my neighborhood swim club.

Weather is closing in & back to work today so no more flying for a few days. Can't wait to get back out to get footage for another project.
 

GadgetGuy

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,161
LOL - its just my neighborhood swim club.

Weather is closing in & back to work today so no more flying for a few days. Can't wait to get back out to get footage for another project.
One question. Wouldn't you be better off shooting jpeg stills with sufficient overlap for the stitching, as they would be higher quality than the 4K extracted stills, and there must be huge redundancy in selecting 60 stiils for each 360° rotation? Same with using 10 rows for the gimbal elevation. You should only need just enough overlap to allow the stitching, not 60 frames for 360° and not 10 frames for the 120° of gimbal elevation. Rather than a redundant 500 frame stitch of video stills, you should be able to get better results from a strategically selected jpeg stills grid of well less than 50 jpegs, say 10 to cover the 360° and 5 to cover the 120° of elevation. That should be plenty of overlap for stitching with a 20mm ultra wideangle lens with its huge field of view. I'll bet you could probably even get the same results with just a 5 by 3 grid consisting of a mere 15 images, 5 for the 360° and three for the 120°.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 15, 2015
Messages
36
Reaction score
24
Age
50
One question. Wouldn't you be better off shooting jpeg stills with sufficient overlap for the stitching, as they would be higher quality than the 4K extracted stills, and there must be huge redundancy in selecting 60 stiils for each 360° rotation?
Thought about that but everything I read says the more photos / stills the better. No way I could have been able to uniformly take 500+. Even with taking the videos I only had 30% battery left before landing.

The extracted pictures from the video were 3000 x ~2100 if I remember. Stills were 3k x 4K so yes a bit of a smaller picture. But I think the final product looks great especially at 500' high.
 

GadgetGuy

Premium Pilot
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
6,817
Reaction score
2,161
Thought about that but everything I read says the more photos / stills the better. No way I could have been able to uniformly take 500+. Even with taking the videos I only had 30% battery left before landing.

The extracted pictures from the video were 3000 x ~2100 if I remember. Stills were 3k x 4K so yes a bit of a smaller picture. But I think the final product looks great especially at 500' high.
No question that the final product looks great! However, since the 4K camera has a 94° field of view horizontally, to cover 360°, you only need 4 images with 4° of overlap each to cover it, not 60. Take 6 and you'll have 30° of overlap, which should be plenty. For the vertical 120°, take 3 or 4 because of the HD narrow frame top to bottom with plenty of overlap. More isn't better, once you have enough to stitch the edges together. It's just redundant. You aren't creating a super high pixel count wide angle view by stitching 5° FOV 400mm telephoto frames together. Instead, these are all 20mm equivalent frame images, which don't gain resolution, but only gain increased field of view from 94° to 360° and covers the full 120° of the gimbal elevation range. Those needed 12 jpeg frames should only take a minute to shoot in 3 rows of 4 images as you rotate 60° per frame, at each of the three gimbal elevations of straight down, 60° up from there, and 120° up from there. The post work will also be reduced by 95%. :cool: More time to shoot more of these stellar creations! Can't wait to try one myself, now that I realize how easy the shooting is, and that only 12 images need to be stitched together in post to create the same results!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
86
Reaction score
46
Location
Philadelphia
No question that the final product looks great! However, since the 4K camera has a 94° field of view horizontally, to cover 360°, you only need 4 images with 4° of overlap each to cover it, not 60. Take 6 and you'll have 30° of overlap, which should be plenty. For the vertical 120°, take 3 or 4 because of the HD narrow frame top to bottom with plenty of overlap. More isn't better, once you have enough to stitch the edges together. It's just redundant. You aren't creating a super high pixel count wide angle view by stitching 5° FOV 400mm telephoto frames together. Instead, these are all 20mm equivalent frame images, which don't gain resolution, but only gain increased field of view from 94° to 360° and covers the full 120° of the gimbal elevation range. Those needed 12 jpeg frames should only take a minute to shoot in 3 rows of 4 images as you rotate 60° per frame, at each of the three gimbal elevations of straight down, 60° up from there, and 120° up from there. The post work will also be reduced by 95%. :cool: More time to shoot more of these stellar creations! Can't wait to try one myself, now that I realize how easy the shooting is, and that only 12 images need to be stitched together in post to create the same results!
This is exactly what I was thinking as I read the method. The result is awesome. I have seen some other stitching with PTGui, and is does a great job. I will have to give this a try with PSCC using the stills method. If weather is good tonight, I will at least capture the photos.
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
99
Reaction score
23
That looks amazing! I saw that you said the jpg was 20mb; how big was the final html file?
 

MDR

Joined
May 26, 2015
Messages
133
Reaction score
77
Age
56
Sounds like a lot of post editing work.....good job !
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
137,503
Messages
1,421,147
Members
99,862
Latest member
rodrigolinkweb