Hi Bruno On Nov 25, 10:11 am, Bruno Postle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon 24-Nov-2008 at 17:47 -0800, Tom Sharpless wrote: > > > > >> >> >>http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/frac/ho_52.63.2.htm# > >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/3056638979/ > >Would agree that your tilted Panini does not look as "right" as the > >original? A lot of that is just because slanting columns aren't as > >comfortable as vertical ones; but I think part of it is because your > >change reveals that the original doesn't really have the single point > >perspective it appears to do. Try the same thing with a rectilinear > >photo. > > The original looks wrong to my TV-trained eyes because the optical > centre isn't in the middle of the canvas (this isn't actually wrong > of course). > > The right hand column looks flat in the tilted version because it > has the different viewpoint treatment in the original - but that > looks like a series of mistakes made by the painter/assistant, I > would have added another drape to cover up these bits that don't > work. > Thanks for the analysis.
> Here is another much older perspective that has the same treatment > but doesn't show any of these problems: > > http://bugbear.postle.net/~bruno/misc/durer/durer-st-jerome.jpghttp://bugbear.postle.net/~bruno/misc/durer/durer-st-jerome-perspecti... > Thanks again! The Durer certainly survives tilting better than the Panini. I wouldn't swear to it, and maybe it is an artefact of photographic reproduction, but it seems to me that Albrecht's straight lines are ever-so-subtly curved (which is more like how our eye, as opposed to our brain, would see the scene) and that his ceiling and side wall have slightly different vanishing points, which emphasizes the monumental perspective at upper left. > >The "cuboid" is not technically a multi-point perspective, because all > >6 faces are viewed from the same point, but it is certainly a multiple > >perspective, as each face has a different projection axis. Presented > >flat, it can't be seen as anything other than 6 separate pictures, > >though I suppose it was derived from a seamless spherical panorama. > > These are more of Seb's images, they are actually full 360 degree > panoramas: > > http://flickr.com/photos/sbprzd/1288172676/http://flickr.com/photos/sbprzd/1291236935/ > Thanks[2]. Seb is a true genius, no two ways about that. Regards, Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
