--- On Fri, 31/7/09, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
But the point I was trying to make was more that of 'We get
stopped and told
we have to ask permission' while Goggle stick two fingers
up and just carry on
regardless. It is about time there was a level playing
field, and just
John Smith wrote:
--- On Fri, 31/7/09, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
But the point I was trying to make was more that of 'We get
stopped and told
we have to ask permission' while Goggle stick two fingers
up and just carry on
regardless. It is about time there was a level playing
--- On Fri, 31/7/09, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
more inclusive than is necessary. So from my perspective
they ARE
intentionally going out of their way to invade privacy by
showing views that
are simply not normally visible? If we want to see what is
over a wall we can
now
their kit looks quite bulky. I've got just one videocamera (and no
LIDAR) fitted, and it all mounts on handlebars with room to spare for
other stuff.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Georeference_video
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the cameras up above the traffic?
other people
2009/7/30 OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com:
their kit looks quite bulky. I've got just one videocamera (and no
LIDAR) fitted, and it all mounts on handlebars with room to spare for
other stuff.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Georeference_video
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the
--- On Thu, 30/7/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the cameras
up above the traffic?
I guess they are recording in higher resolutions. The
problem with
I don't know what res street view in general is but you can't read most
John Smith wrote:
Sent: 30 July 2009 10:42 AM
To: OJ W; m...@koppenhoefer.com
Cc: OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Google StreetView From Bikes
--- On Thu, 30/7/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the cameras
up above the traffic
OJ W wrote:
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the cameras up above the traffic?
THAT I think is the big mistake that Google made. Pushing the camera head up
so that it looks OVER security walls and hedges is what annoys people the
most. If a person has to use a ladder to obtain a
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Lester Caineles...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
OJ W wrote:
Maybe the big tricycle is needed to lift the cameras up above the traffic?
THAT I think is the big mistake that Google made. Pushing the camera head up
so that it looks OVER security walls and hedges is what
Yann Coupin wrote:
The problem is that your reasoning doesn't take bus/coach/hgv into
account. You're probably going to be as high in each of those vehicules
as Google's cams are...
Not on many of the private roads that are now being photographed but from
which large vehicles are banned -
2009/7/30 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
Simply filming and saying 'we will remove pictures if you want' is just
arrogance that should not be condoned.
What's wrong with it? Where's the exact line dividing looking with
naked eye and filming? Since a camera is a set of light sensors and
Hi,
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
The idea of google streetview infringing anybody's privacy is so misled.
I'm sure there is lots of intelligent argument on both sides of the
fence and I have no desire of going into the details here.
But on a more general note - I think that someone's privacy is
I meant to send this to the list
As an idea for 'openstreetviewbike' you could use a single camera pointing
straight up with a rotating mirror above it in order to capture in all
directions at once.
The velocity of the bike would probably be OK to still capture pictures
with close enough
I meant to send this to the list...
What's wrong with it? Where's the exact line dividing looking with
naked eye and filming?
I think that the difference here is that they make the images available
for others to view. There can be a great difference between taking a
picture of a drunk,
As an idea for 'openstreetviewbike' you could use a single camera
pointing
straight up with a rotating mirror above it in order to capture in all
directions at once.
A colleague suggested using a hi-res camera shooting upwards onto a fixed
multi-angle mirror.
How much resolution do you need
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:51 PM, si...@mungewell.org wrote:
A Canon EOS Rebel, a few mirrors and some glue... might be an interesting
experiment.
The Canon 30D (for example) is rated for 100,000 shutter cycles. If you
take a shot every 1-10 seconds, you'll be able to go for roughly 6
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Ian Dees wrote:
That's why Google uses high-res digital video cameras running on Firewire on
their rigs.
I was more expecting the Elphel board design ;) Using 20MP kodak's CCDs
like they use in their book digitizing stuff.
Stefan
--- On Thu, 30/7/09, si...@mungewell.org si...@mungewell.org wrote:
What's wrong with it? Where's the exact line
dividing looking with
naked eye and filming?
I think that the difference here is that they make the
images available
for others to view. There can be a great difference
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:22:23 -0500
Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
The Canon 30D (for example) is rated for 100,000 shutter cycles. If you
take a shot every 1-10 seconds, you'll be able to go for roughly 6 straight
hours before the shutter will fail.
OK so how nerdy am I, just spent
John Smith wrote:
--- On Thu, 30/7/09, si...@mungewell.org si...@mungewell.org wrote:
What's wrong with it? Where's the exact line
dividing looking with
naked eye and filming?
I think that the difference here is that they make the
images available
for others to view. There can be a
This is very interesting and might be useful if at some point we get Google
to open up the license of their street view images:
http://fivebells.livejournal.com/24977.html
In other news, how's openstreetphoto doing?
___
talk mailing list
21 matches
Mail list logo
