 |
|
Topic started on 22-11-2004 @ 07:45 AM by tandino
|
Hi folks, check this out it's pretty amazing
The 2.2 Gigapixel Picture
Have a good look and don't forget to zoom... I now have no doubt that we could easily be observed from space. If nothing else, it's a fantastic
bit of photography. I wonder when, if ever, this kind of tech will be available to us.
Peace
Tandino
Edit for subject title accuracy
[edit on 23-11-2004 by tandino]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 07:50 AM by sardion2000
|
Yikes you can actually read the licence plates on the cars and see peoples faces. I really really want that camera:drool:
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 07:54 AM by tandino
|
If you look carefully at the long white building to the far-right of the pic, you can see (in pretty good detail) a guy walking around the top corner
of it looking down at the floor! All these people would be totally unaware the picture was being taken. Really scary stuff imho.
Peace
Tandino
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:04 AM by Azza
|
It gets really fuzzy for me when i zoom to much  if it werked it would be some funky stuff  ...remember to smile constantly...they can see your
dental work
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:10 AM by kessel
|
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:10 AM by tandino
|
I suppose it depends on your computer and how busy it is when you're looking at the pic... On my work computer, it's fuzzy for a couple of seconds
then rights itself. It is crazy though. I'm gonna be walking around with a telescope and keeping a close eye on the rooftops from now on...
Peace
Tandino
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:12 AM by kessel
|
let it sit in a spot for a sec and the fuzzi ness goes away
[edit on 22-11-2004 by kessel]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:14 AM by IAF101
|
Hey , I'm getting the fuzzy bit too!
Wonder whats wrong! But the detail I can see Is amazing!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 08:49 AM by rancid1
|
Did you all see the topless sun bather?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:07 AM by tandino
|
I can't say I did mate. The computer in work just ran out of virtual memory, good old XP. I don't really need to look for nudity where I work,
I'm surrounded by it! If she knew she was being photographed, I wonder if she'd still have gone topless...
Peace
Tandino
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:10 AM by ThEeNd
|
near the same building were you saw the guy near the corner there is a guy that is near a sign and he is floating is the street his body is cut off.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:15 AM by rancid1
|
Originally posted by ThEeNd
near the same building were you saw the guy near the corner there is a guy that is near a sign and he is floating is the street his body is cut off.

errrr ummm say that again in English please? lol
I SEE WALDO!!
[edit on 22-11-2004 by rancid1]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:28 AM by tandino
|
Originally posted by ThEeNd
near the same building were you saw the guy near the corner there is a guy that is near a sign and he is floating is the street his body is cut off.

Good spot there mate, hadn't noticed that before. You get the prize of...
Err well nothing really. Good spot all the same!
Peace
Tandino
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:31 AM by HowardRoark
|
Cool.
Has anyone else spoted the naked girl?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:45 AM by Mizar
|
I saw the man whith out the body that you speak of
on the big road to the right go to the left side walk and zoom in all the way and go up you should see him.
i think it was to protect his identy but they if thats the case why did they leave the licence plates visible. not like i live in UK anyway
you cam see some toilet paper in one of the windows thats cool you can distinctly make out 4 rolls
[edit on 22-11-2004 by Mizar]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:47 AM by QuietSoul
|
Neat picture, kinda reminds me of this 15 meg picture of WTC
Theres a 250meg bmp out there of this same pic too, I have it on my hd, but ill be damned if i upload/host it ;p
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 09:52 AM by Mizar
|
on the street to the right. kinda far in the back next to the octagonal building in the upper right corner there is a bus that has engulfed a car. i
think ths is the combonaiton of many different immages. becasue they have all kinds of cut offs on people heads, legs, and cars
it has to be the combo of man immages taken at mabye 1 second intervals
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 10:05 AM by HowardRoark
|
Good spot. It is the same guy that is walking around the corner of the building. This picture is a composite. It was probacly taken with a large
format camera (a view camera) with a sliding back attachment for the digital sensor array.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 10:16 AM by tandino
|
I'm aware, it's a panoramic shot of a place in Germany (my German knowledge is rubbish, I only think it's in Germany because there's a sign on the
side of a building that reads "Warmte-Krachtcentrale")
As far as I'm aware, A panorama is one long photograph that consists of many smaller ones all joined together and edited or whatnot. It doesn't
surprise me that there's a few bits here and there. I suppose if they had used the Matrix style 'flow mo' technique, the image would be more
consistent. Pretty scary though.
Peace
Tandino
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 10:33 AM by HowardRoark
|
Actually a panorama is just a shot that is very wide compared to it’s height.
The aspect ratio of that photo is fairly normal.
There are some very high pixel digital backs out there that would be capable of this resolution, but they are expensive, in the $25,000 (U.S.) range.
This picture was most likely taken with a large format camera the type that takes 4” x 5” film. The digital back only covers a portion of that image
area, so they have special attachments that let you slide the back across the film plane without moving the camera itself.
Modern lenses are easily capable of that resolution and if the photographer had a film back in there the film would have the same resolution also.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |