On December 21, 2010 10:40:21 pm Tom Sharpless wrote:
> It never ceases to amaze me that up in Redmond they pay people good
> money to do such work.
it happens everywhere where money is too easy.
> I keep suggesting that our primary stitching targets should include
> the cube, since so many of
On 22 Dez., 04:40, Tom Sharpless wrote:
>
> I keep suggesting that our primary stitching targets should include
> the cube, since so many of our panos end up that way. It would be only
> a little extra work to make an engine for that do the TOAST and Pierce
> Quincuncial projections too.
This mad
Once again, Microsoft takes a poor idea and runs with it. It never
ceases to amaze me that up in Redmond they pay people good money to do
such work.
Not that I have anything against tiled projections. Printing
dodecahedral panoramas seems quite popular, there are several programs
for that. On t
On 16 Dez., 15:50, Seb Perez-D wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 15:48, Sebastien Perez-Duarte
>
> wrote:
> > A much better projection is the Peirce Quincuncial. It is also square,
> > but is almost everywhere conformal.
>
> Sorry, I forgot the Wikipedia link!
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe
