16 bit conversion to cube faces and back?

[Ed Fink]

I've been using Eric Gerds batch files to convert my equirectangular's to cube faces for editing zenith and nadir, then coverting them back to equirectangular to finish processing.

Today I tried that with Pano2VR and it worked great - except it converted to 8 bit cube faces. I couldn't find any setting for controlling that. Is it possible to keep a full 16 bit workflow?

Ed
http://BigEyeInTheSky.com

[360Texas]

Hi Ed, yes I just finished a 16bit project and did notice that moving to cube was only 8bit. And converting the 8bit cube faces back to Spherical resulted in a 8 bit spherical image.

Q. Is there a way to maintain a complete 16bit work flow??

http://360texas.com/virtualtour/texas/s ... extest.htm

[Ed Fink]

Hi Dave. I wouldn't mind if it was the last step, but I convert to faces and sometimes do some extensive Photoshopping on the zenith and nadir before converting back to an equirectangular. I'd like to keep that the best quality I can.

I can keep using Eric's batch files, which gives me 16 bit conversions to/from faces, so it's not a show stopper for me. But I'd rather streamline my workflow and do it with Pano2VR if that's possible. Doesn't Pano2VR use PTStitcher too?

Ed
http://BigEyeInTheSky.com

[thomas]

For the moment Pano2VR doesn't use PanoTools and the image library I am currently using only supports 8 bit output. This may change in the future but at the moment I find the best solution for a 16 bit workflow (and imho also in 8 bit) is the Photoshop plugin from Rune Spaans because you can extract zenith/nadir only so you don't need to remap the rest which keeps the quality high and you don't have to leave Photoshop.
Here is the link: http://www.superrune.com/technical/soft ... ocubic.php

[Roy Reed]

For the moment Pano2VR doesn't use PanoTools and the image library I am currently using only supports 8 bit output. This may change in the future but at the moment I find the best solution for a 16 bit workflow (and imho also in 8 bit) is the Photoshop plugin from Rune Spaans because you can extract zenith/nadir only so you don't need to remap the rest which keeps the quality high and you don't have to leave Photoshop.
Here is the link: http://www.superrune.com/technical/soft ... ocubic.php

For anyone who's interested this plugin also works with CorelPhotoPaint and probably PaintShop Pro.

[ericob]

For the moment Pano2VR doesn't use PanoTools and the image library I am currently using only supports 8 bit output.

I took a leap of faith when I purchased Pano2VR and I have to say this is disappointing to hear. I already have tools that allow me to produce every product that Pano2VR does, but I was hoping to avoid the multiple steps and trips through multiple bits of software. I applaud the concept of a "Project" document, where a single "master" source panorama can be processed to produce multiple output versions: Quicktime, Flash, thumbnail images, etc.

But in the workflow that I have settled on, that master file is a 16-bit file. (It is also in the ProPhotoRGB color space, but that a subject for another post!)

This may change in the future but at the moment I find the best solution for a 16 bit workflow (and imho also in 8 bit) is the Photoshop plugin from Rune Spaans because you can extract zenith/nadir only so you don't need to remap the rest which keeps the quality high and you don't have to leave Photoshop.

This might be useful except for two problems:

First: "Spherical to Cubic to Spherical" is a Windows-only tool. I use Macintosh.

Second: I prefer not to work that way because any change will overwrite my master file. For a tiny touchup, I wouldn't mind, but a mistake in any large change (such as adding an ID badge of some sort to the Nadir) could not be hidden. In my case, to "undo" that step would require I go back to Photoshop, re-import my tone-mapped version as Camera raw, re-apply my tone, color and sharpening modifications, open the file, edit the face(s) again, save that file again, quit Photoshop, go back to Pano2VR... etc. Far far far too much time spent. (I have had to go through very much the same thing, using the Panotools plugins to extract and re-insert a cube face -- I don't like it at all!)

And, yes, I could save a duplicate version of my color-corrected master version as a backup, should face-editing go wrong, but that adds additional complexity too.

I'd much rather have my "master" file be a color corrected 16-bit file in equirectangular format, convert that to cube faces in Pano2VR and continue from there. The master file automatically remains untouched. Pano2VR would, of course, [optionally] convert the 16-bit data down to 8 bit when producing output files.

So: Since 16-bit images are no longer esoteric things, I urge you to find a more modern image library and update to it at the earliest possible moment!

Thanks.

[thomas]

16 bit (and HDR support) are very high on the priority list but first I have to add all the features of Pano2QTVR to send it into retirement. I hope to reach that point before the end of this year and after that 16bit support will be one of the next things.

[Robert Harshman]

Hi Thomas,

I second the need for 16 bit support as I've been testing the SuperRune filter too and while it's a nice concept, it's quite limited to the file sizes it can process. It seems to only work on EQ's upto about 6,000 by 3,000 pixels.

I'm usually using at least a 8,000 by 4,000 master file and as you may remember even more interested in 20,000+ pixel size EQ files.

Regards,

Robert

[hum@no.id]

For anyone who's interested this plugin also works with CorelPhotoPaint...

Yes... I too confirm - work fine in Corel PhotoPaint

[HansNyberg]

Hi Thomas,
I second the need for 16 bit support as I've been testing the SuperRune filter too and while it's a nice concept, it's quite limited to the file sizes it can process. It seems to only work on EQ's upto about 6,000 by 3,000 pixels.
Robert

I have to say I am dissapointed. I did not even check this before I bought it as I expected full 16 bit support as a absolute requirement for a new application like Pano2VR.

I also just discovered that I can not create cubefaces in JPG even if the dialog says that I should set the compression. It just has no option for JPG but makes tif of them. In the output side for remapping there is no option for single cubefaces but just for strips.

This is just stupid. I will have to compress the cubefaces in Photoshop.
And there is no option to choose naming for them either. You can just use numbers so you have to rename them if you need u d r b etc.

Well It seems I am back to Cubic Converter

Hans

[ericob]

16 bit (and HDR support) are very high on the priority list but first I have to add all the features of Pano2QTVR to send it into retirement. I hope to reach that point before the end of this year and after that 16bit support will be one of the next things.

What you say certainly makes sense... trying to keep the old version up-to-date simply because it provide some "must have" features for some subset of the user population would be a real drain on your energy.

A possible point of interest: I have never used Pano2QTVR... I have no idea what its feature set is, or how it compares to Pano2VR. I have no idea what is "missing" from Pano2VR that is in Pano2QTVR. (Is there, umm, a list somewhere?) Or whether I would care about any of them.

Why? I'm a Macintosh user. The only reason I'm trying out (well, actually, purchased) Pano2VR, is because it looked "promising." ("Ah! Someone else who has bought into the value of the cross-platform idea. Maybe...") So, I have never seen or use the previous product "Pano2QTVR."

At this point, for me, this is where it remains: "Pano2VR looks promising." [Maybe]


Now, it is not my intent to be offensive, or to cause you pain, but these are my feelings at the moment:

Without full support of 16-bit files, without (as far as I know) any support for color profiles (reading and writing), without the ability to output compressed cube faces to spec... Pano2VR remains, at best, a limited tool that might satisfy beginners or hobbyists. Considering these (and other) limitations, I feel that the current price is at least 3 to 5 times higher than the value delivered. (And while we're talking about quality and value, can we please get rid of wonky behavior like 'Unless you are using jpeg, please disregard this slider control as it really won't have any effect' ? Hmm?

You have GOT to be kidding!

Just please never add the word "Pro" to the application if it is still doing this, OK? Good Grief!

Perhaps you have a "day job" that cuts into your development time [goodness know, there probably aren't many shareware authors who can make a living off the sales of only a single product!].

Nevertheless, as a customer, I must say that I find the development progress of Pano2QTVR extraordinarily, painfully... slow.

The current version ("2.0 b2c") was released October 23. Today is December 3, nearly a month later -- Is there no progress since a month ago?? If there has been progress, what is it?? Some "visible" activity, at least every 2 weeks, would not be a bad target. How about a "Developer's Blog?" No, you do not need to add something every day. But, ya know... a few crumbs for the masses every week or so? Perhaps??

(Mind you, I do not want you to post every build you make!) And while I'm on the subject of builds... can you please attempt to get more professional (or at least follow some "standard") with your numbering scheme?

I have nowhere else seen a scheme that allows a "beta 2, c." What the heck is that? You're not ready to go to "B3," but you need to fix B2 so... "c!?" Oh come on! It is either a version of beta 2, or version of beta 3.

That's all.

There IS no such thing as a "slightly more than beta 2, but I don't want to call it beta 3."

If nothing else, this is just very confusing for the end user to make sense of. I am not going to spend the time doing the research for you, but there are many, existing, numbering schemes. You do not need to (should not try to) invent one yourself.

For example, after "version 1," one may be working on "version 2." [Your situation is complicated by the fact that "version 1"--Pano2QTVR--is being "retired" and so "Pano2VR version 1" is essentially "Pano2QTVR, version 2." Nevertheless, well-established numbering schemes exist. Try one of them out.

"2.0b..." means the BETA BRANCH of version 2.

"2.0b..." remains "2.0b..." until it "ships," whereupon it becomes "2.0."

As development on version 2.0 proceeds, the beta version may increment.

"2.0b5," "2.0b6," "2.0b6.1" (at this point, things can get confusing!)


Not to get all Project Management Nutty with you, but... do you have measurable "milestones?" Do you have a "roadmap?' Do you have way to talk about features your absolutely intend to be in "version 2.1," or "version 2.2," or... "later... not sure when" ?
...
[Too tired to continue fussing with this... now pressing the Submit button.]

[smooth]

How to peel an orange?

Regards, Smooth

[thomas]

I can understand what you mean and yes I have "another job". I am a student for computer graphics.
To the numbering schema:
I want to release Pano2VR 2.0 at some point (2.0 because of Pano2QTVR was numbered to 1.6.6 and to make it clear whats new even if its a different product). To get there I released beta1, the first beta for 2.0. Unfortunately I made some small errors and I added just some small fixed. For the quick fixes I have chosen letters because I find 2.0 beta 1.1 stupid... so it was beta 1a. The same happened with beta 2a,2b,... In most of the fixes just changed 1 or 2 lines of code or upgraded the framework to the next version.

For the Roadmap:
I have a good plan what I want to add in the next year or two. Yes, you are right there was very little progress the last 6 weeks mainly because I made some exams to finish my masters and I was rewriting the core engine for the Flash 9 export because Adobe finally (after 1.5 years!) released the specs for the Flash 9 file format. This is not very exciting for you as a user and you may not notice the difference at all but now the internal design is much better and allows me to add other exciting things.
"Rewriting the core" means that for the last 6 weeks there was no fully working program that I could release. In the future I may speed up the release cycles but currently I am at a point where this is simple not possible/useful.

The next things will be:

beta 3: Skin Editor - embedding/creating your own navigation element, links, ... within the panorama. The skin will be embedded in the SWF so no external files will be needed.
beta 4?: HTML Export, Templates for SPi-V PtViewer,... , Sound?, QuickTime - Sprites?
beta 5?: Patch Tool, 16bit support, EXIF?, (Color Profiles?)

btw: You can find a list of features of Pano2QTVR/Pano2VR and what is missing at: http://gardengnomesoftware.com/features.php

[ericob]

How to peel an orange?

Regards, Smooth

Do you mean "onion?" Like, "many layers of an onion?"

[ericob]

Oh my!

Student; masters' exams; reading Flash API docs; rewriting core... yeah, add those all up and a person could be quite busy.

I admit to being very ambivalent about a "Developer's Blog." It's one thing to type in a quick note ("Yea! Adobe release the Flash 9 API! Now I can rewrite the core of Pano2VR for Flash 9 export.") and quite another thing to have to deal the the barrage of questions and discussion those 3 sentences might engender.

But "Busy this week studying for exams..." might have the benefit of creating a bit of empathy on the part of impatient users.

Be sure to take your vitamins!