Panoramic, high resolution picture of London | Hacker News Reader

Panoramic, high resolution picture of London

btlondon2012.co.uk

162 pointsdanielhunt99 comments

Hi,

Creator of the image here. First of all, thank you for all the attention, it's a real honor to be on the front page oF HN for almost a whole day now.

I am the founder of 360cities.net and creator of previous world record images such as "Prague 18 gigapixels", "Strahov Library 40 gigapixels" and "London 80 Gigapixels". This newest image was commissioned by BT as a kind of closing "Thank you London" gesture of the Olympic year. Of course, they didn't want "just" a jaw-droppingly enormous image, they wanted a world record image! Unfortunately, these things are getting a lot harder to accomplish, and we're starting to go up against some constrainsts of optics, air density, and so on.

So, to create this image, we needed 4 cameras shooting simultaneously in order to get all the images in a reasonable length of time. We needed the very best optics out there, and CMOS sensors with the smallest pixels (somewhat unfortunately this meant the 3 year old Canon 7D). We needed the fasted and most precise panoramic robots to mount the cameras on. We needed gigantic memory cards, 128GB, to store a full run of images on one card. We needed 4 laptops to copy the cards quick enough to shoot again (buying more cards wasn't in the budget). In short, we needed a ridiculous amount of gear - this took 2 days to set up.

We spent 3 days shooting. The first day it was raining, but we shot anyway to learn the gear and see what mistakes we might make. The second day there were 50km/h winds which, 150 meters up, is very cold and a little bit dangerous. We made sure the gear was triple secured, and we shot anyway. One of the three photographers threatened to leave the project. It was unpleasant. But we uncovered more issues which we were able to solve. Keep in mind the cameras were moving continuously, and focusing, and shooting - they never stopped to take a shot. 12600 shots while moving and focusing each time? This required some very exacting work, knowing the gear, and maybe even a bit of luck.

Day 3 was clear, and not windy. We got 2 sets of images shot. All cameras got the shots they needed in 2 sets. That is 96000 images with not a shot missed. This to me is a huge technological achievement that i'm proud of, and I will sing the praises of Canon anytime someone asks me to :-)

Now, on to stitching. Normally I have no problem stitching 2 or 4 thousand images. But this is an order of magnitude more. As gabriel weinberg noted recently, you find out what breaks when you increase things by an order of magnitude.

Basically, the stitching software, Kolor Autopano Giga, was basically inoperable with this size data set. They scolded me for not having told them about this shoot beforehand. They told me that they know about the issues but other things are taking precedence in the development of the software. Stitching a world record amount of images is, by definition, an edge case. So they weren't really able to help me.

Stitching ended up taking nearly 4 months when we thought it would take about 4 weeks. These 4 months were spent working until 3 or 4am many nights of the week. Deadlines slipped. I suffered. My family suffered. After 6 weeks of work I had accomplished nearly nothing and started to panic. I just had to keep on pushing....

In the end, we had to set a delivery date for the client. This required me to leave a few mistakes in the image that I would have liked to fix. However keep in mind that some areas of bad alignment on a normal image might take 30 minutes to fix, but with this size project in the software, it took A WEEK to fix. This kind of work is extremely demoralizing and there isn't much to be learned from it either.

In the end, the image is finished. As they say "you never finish, you only stop!". I'll probably make a few more fixes, later. For right now I need to decompress for a while.

So that is some background on how the image was created. It's not perfect, but overall it is much better than I expected. Shipping it was a terrible, brutal grind that I hope to never experience again. But it's done now and that feels pretty sweet.

I'm typing this on the bus home from the airport after being in London for a tv show where they announced the image. That was fun. But the best feeling is knowing that the thing is finished and shipped, and if I ever have to do a similar job again I will hopefully learn from the mistakes made on this one and not have such a terrible grind again.

I'm happy to answer any questions about the image that I didn't answer here. thank you!

I have some constructive criticism.

The main problems are:

* The image has too much unsharp mask applied, which unfortunately is quite noticeable. The buildings look too sharp, too much edge contrast from over-sharpening.

* The HDR effect looks too obvious and forced. This image is definitely not a good candidate for HDR. It simply wasn't needed, and reduces the quality of the image.

* You've inverted the mouse scrolling, it's the wrong way around! Clicking and dragging with the mouse to the left of screen should move the image to the right, as it does on Google street view - this is the way panoramas are mostly done. There's no right or wrong, but it's confusing to have the opposite of what is conventional.

Hi Exodust,

OK, I have heard quite a lot that I used too much USM (unsharp mask). Fine, I will tone it down on the next iteration. Without any USM, the image just looked a bit foggy, washed out, and not very nice at all. I went a bit overboard on it, I agree with you. It is very difficult to get a balance with an image of this resolution, because when you're zoomed all the way in, I think the amount of USM is ok (I like the stark contrast with a lot of blacks and a lot of whites) but when you zoom out, it looks a bit yucky. With a lower resolution image there isn't as much difference in tonal contrast between the most zoomed in and zoomed out tones.

There is no HDR effect at all - it is only the USM artifacts that I speak of above.

Mouse - see my other comment below - we are using the "original" QTVR (and video games) style scrolling which is more "Virtual Reality" than the "click and drag" that has now become standard. Again, I agree, we will start using the "new standard".

Amazing work. It's incredible (and a bit scary in a big brother way) to be able to zoom-in CSI-style across such a large distance and still see faces / license plates, especially with mostly consumer/pro-level equipment on an ad-budget.

Very interesting! Sounds like a monumental effort! Though if it was only the stitching that took the vast majority of time and effort, no doubt you or others should be able to break this record yet again in time as software progresses?

How long (and when - start date and time) did it take to get all those 96,000 images on Day 3, please?

It took 90 minutes to shoot one set of images and 60 minutes to copy those images off the memory card.

Note: USB 3 card readers (that we were able to buy) are not really "usb 3" :-(

Thanks for the info! And ouch, regarding USB 3.0 SDHC card readers...

Separately, did you consider trying other stitching software, like PTGui Pro - or have done for smaller shoots? It seems, at least in the past, that PTGui used to be an order of magnitude faster with similar feature support and results as Autopano Giga.

That said, Autopano Giga directly supports graphics processor acceleration, which I am not sure PTGui can on Mac. Did you take advantage of this feature?

Hi,

I have used PtGui since 2004, It is great software. But it is not suitable for stitching panoramas containing thousands of images for various reasons.

I did try it with a set of 12600 images and it failed to detect control points on a few hundred images, so this was a no-go.

Autopano Giga supports GPU to some extent, but not for much, really. Mostly for some display stuff, but not for rendering or any other really heavy stuff (AFAIK).

Both Autopano and PTGui are really amazing programs, I like them both!

Since I've had nothing better to do that look at the pictures for a bit, I'm confident that it was Sunday, 28th October 2012, with one set of photos starting around 1pm facing north and another one used for filling in gaps a bit later - starting somewhere between 3pm and 4pm (harder to be precise - there are fewer clocks visible from this one).

Whoa ;-)

Excellent work! You can feel comfortable that you will have a long lasting legacy; it's a real snapshot of history, imagine having one of these from 1912. Would it be possible to see one or two of the individual images (to get a better perspective)?

Thank you very much. This is actually a comforting thought. I hope the image actually does stick around far enough into the future for it to have the value you suggest. So much of what we create in the world of computers and software seems more like performance art than anything truly long-lasting.

You're welcome. By pushing the boundaries you create something with the potential to sustain as more than a throwaway gimmick.

I agree the fragility of content in the online world is.. worrying, if you take a long term perspective. I imagine the licensing of this content is the major risk here, as presumably BT are holding the copyright (even without the legal hurdle I doubt anyone could download the whole thing, without considerable effort).. all it would take to kill it is for BT to lose interest.

If you care about the legacy i would push for BT to allow the data to be shared (eventually), although i doubt this would work (mostly for bureaucratic reasons). If you have access to the work then i know what i would do; make 2 back ups to be stored in safe, separate places, to be released upon retirement, death, or BT losing interest (or ceasing to exist!). As raw as possible (they will have better image editing and stitching in photoshop 2110!). If this were free in the wild i guarantee it would last for at least 100's of years; storing a few TB of data is only going to get easier, and it's cultural/historical significance is only going to increase over time. [hint: do this]

IMO there are few works able to offer the quantity of insight into some aspects of early 21st C life, or the state of London.

These are nice suggestions. I have been considering how to make some of my works Creative Commons in order to get them disseminated more (and also to hopefully make even more money from them)

BT does not hold the copyright. However they do "own" the image for at least a while - they are the client, and we want to keep them happy of course :-)

Cheers!

I'm incredibly impressed. I was able to see the brand of someone's laundry detergent through a window. I've never seen that type of zoom before one one of these.

Which lenses were used?

Why do the images get more "foggy" at the max zoom level?

Do you have any photos of the robots operating the cameras?

Hi,

1) we used a canon 400mm f/2.8 L ii lens with a canon 2x teleconverter (mark 3)

2) the images get more "foggy" at the max zoom level because at the smaller magnification, I was able to apply some filters to the image (unsharp mask, mostly) to improve the local contrast. At the deepest zoom level, this is not possible, because the source files at this level were too large to open in Photoshop. I have applied some color corrections to the source images, and I am re-rendering these files, but I didn't make the deadline to put this live. It will go live in a few weeks probably.

That's a nice $11,489 lens. :)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732109-USA/Canon_4412B...

I noticed the same thing. I think the max zoom level are the images have original color settings and mostly untouched while the non-max zoom pictures have been color calibrated (more contrast and such).

(Disclaimer: I'm not a photographer)

did you guys try to stitch in batches, iteratively? like a few k at a time, then stitching the larger ones together? it seems like there is a lot of room for improvement if you can feed the photos in a pre-sequenced order also, rather than just throwing the full batch in and treating them like a giant jigsaw.

Well, the image needs to be optimized all at once in order to have the correct shape. Especially since it is a sphere. You can't really cheat so much.

Re: importing in a pre-sequenced batch: YES this works on a few hundred or thousand images. But it didn't work with these images. The software broke. It didn't work. :-(

Compiled a short list of the more famous sights for those of you not familiar with the city (I'll add more later):

1. The Shard (Tate Modern in the foreground) - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-33.1601...

2. London Eye - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-3.8135&...

3. Tower Bridge - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-38.7356...

4. Wembley Stadium - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=140.7253...

5. Battersea Power Station - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=35.2192&...

6. Olympic Park - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-73.9268...

7. Big Ben & Houses of Parliament - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=6.4768&...

8. MI6 Building - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=14.9167&...

9. St Pauls Cathedral - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-43.8561...

10. Nelsons Column - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=13.4841&...

11. Behind the iconic billboards in Picadilly Circus - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=16.9026&...

12. Harrods Department Store - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=64.6214&...

13. The British Museum - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-45.7275...

There's a good view of Alexandra Palace, about 6 miles away: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-146.3290&#...

Heathrow airport is just about visible (14 miles) -http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=105.9166...

And Wimbledon tennis (the AELTC, 7 miles) - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=58.1529&...

Here's the Gherkin and Canary Warf in the background:

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-48.0944...

I think I found the portal to Cthulhu's plane: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-97.0026...

These things always feel like they pan the reverse way than they should...

Sorry, this panorama uses the original "qtvr" style navigation. Google streetview, maps, and Earth use "click and drag" navigation. There is currently a religious war going on in the pano community about which one is better. I tend to agree that the "click and drag" has become the standard.

I guess I don't get what's so horrible about giving people a choice. This is just a Quake-style mlook implementation at the end of the day, and gamers are used to being able to select the mlook polarity.

But no, there has to be a jihad, and somebody has to "win."

Use keyboard to navigate. It's much better IMO.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-164.6520&#...

Interesting to see a shot capturing the progress of a car which helps determine the rate at which the images were taken.

Wouldn't you have to know its speed?

Of course! I walk past that road everyday so could make an educated guess at 40km/hr. Mind you, my maths skills are poor so I won't be about to start delving any deeper into the calculation!

It was more than one image per second, I can tell you that much. I forgot exactly how quick it was.

I found buzby. :) The image is clickable, which brings up a sweepstakes competition. Cute Easter Egg.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=168.9705...

Busby #2 was a bit harder to find:

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=174.1983...

It's massive! I couldn't find my bedroom window but I've stumbled upon this guy instead : http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=172.0456...

EDIT: I'm wondering - if Google has to anonymise faces and registration plates on street view, shouldn't BT be doing it too with this high-res panoramic image?

Google doesn't HAVE to blur faces (except in only about two countries). They do it as a PR gesture, to please people. This has had terrible effects for photographers, who are often told that "they have to blur faces like Google does".

That looks like a setup, the One Show is a simple early evening show.

next to him is an easter egg if you zoom out slightly http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=169.0923...

Yes, there is no shadow around him, unlike the guy walking past. I think it has been photoshopped in.

Something funky going on here... http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.8554...

I don't remember architecture like this! :P

edit: Wrong link. -_- Intended to post upside-down building...

edit2: Corrected link.

Things look pretty weird here: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.9453...

Ah, you beat me too it. That's exactly the link I was trying to paste. I thought the URL updated automatically, I didn't realise you needed to click share.

That'd just be M.C. Escher's place.

Hmm, if you zoom out there are trees blocking the window. How did they done this?!

The zoomed-in image is off a bit from the zoomed-out image. Just compare the flags when you zoom in and out.

Oops. I appear to have paste the wrong link. I intended to post an upside-down building...!

You have now twice posted what I posted.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5256830

I should thank you for your promotion of it! ;)

Yes it was an accident, heh. :) I meant to paste a link of an upside-down building, but I paste yours (having just looked at it) instead. I can't find the original link I was trying to paste any more! I feel kinda stupid now. >.<

edit: I found it! http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.8554...

This was one of the last errors in the image. I just didn't have another week left to fix this area. :-(

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-56.2662...

Also, this guy?

And here he is again (zoom in!): http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-43.8694...

Very cool. I wish there wasn't as much HDR-like post processing in these images. It kind of has an "uncanny valley" thing going on.

This was likely a necessity to make the zoomed out view look better. If they didn't do that, it'd have all kinds of different lighting from being taken at different times of the day.

There's a surprising lack of people and candid shots compared to the last 10,000-shot panaroma by 360 Cities several years ago!

I assume that has to do with the timing of the shots. These seem to have been taken very early in the morning and towards the beginning of autumn (based on clothing).

Unlike the 360 Cities panaroma, there are far less discontinuities this time, though I have already found a significant one [1]. I guess the almost 5-fold increase in shots is the source of the improvement.

Also, the depth of view in this panaroma is ridiculous! You can actually clearly see individual people playing soccer or walking through very distant parks...

[1] http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.8425...

According to a tower clock I found, this picture was taken at 1:40.

Edit: In the "low resolution" image, the clock reads 1:38. In the second level of zoom, the clock reads closer to 1:41.

According to a tower clock I found, this picture was taken at 1:40.

A tower clock I found shows approx. 09h10.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=161.5165...

Hi,

This image was shot on a Sunday in October.

The London 80 Gigapixel (which I also made) was shot in August. I think that explains the relative lack of people, here.

Wish it had google maps type navigation, wish the images weren't HDRd in post.

Other than that it's pretty cool.

If anyone's interested, the multicolored group of buildings you see when first opening this page is one of Google's offices at Central St Giles. I've been there many times for training/meetings/the free lunch and it's amazing.

They have a 360 degree gym at the very top, along with multiple roof terraces, a huge cafeteria (of course) and soundproofed meeting rooms with funny names.

One of the office floors is styled like a submarine, complete with big metal doors with valves on them. They share the space with multiple Media Agencies and other companies, so you would never know it was there. It's quite surreal and invokes a ton of envy.

Yikes! I live about 2 miles away and I can make out the garden tools on my balcony.

I was able to find my old flat, which was about two miles from BT Tower.

If you look into the black mark under its feet and let it zoom far enough so it snaps into the level of another photo type, you can see the construction it possibly stands on.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-53.1605...

(move a little to the left I guess... it's not working 100% properly)

It strikes me that in such a densely populated environment there is so much under utilised space on the roof tops. Lots of opportunities for sheds and roof gardens.

I think this guy has done a pretty sweet job: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=171.2592...

It strikes me how insignificant the River Thames is from there, I imagine most folks not familiar with London would struggle to find it(!)

A friend of mine Henry Stuart has done some amazing GigaPixel shots of London: http://www.sphericalimages.com/panoramas if you like this kind of thing!

(Including some 360 degree video: http://www.sphericalimages.com/videos )

Someone's going to have a nice meal for two or be ringing two incredibly large attention bells: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-56.2662...

That's Heal's department store on Tottenham Court Road. So neither, it's just a display of wares for sale.

Can't wait for someone to find a couple going at it on a tower block window. Brandon style [1]

[1] http://www.evilbeetgossip.com/2011/03/03/want-to-see-michael...

I don't know how this guy is still standing.

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-46.1228...

I hope no passwords on PostIt notes - http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-92.6367...

This guy's boots look huge: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=194.6209...

Interesting ... http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-96.8192...

Found a Buzby: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=174.0788...

Busy man?

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-64.2875...

Im guessing they mechanical turk (https://www.mturk.com/mturk/welcome) the crud out of these images, taking 3 or 4 photos at the same time of day and if there is a person in the first image then replacing it with the second, i came to this conclusion based on the fact the whole damn city looks like its apocalyptically empty once you get off the ground. None of the office buildings have meetings on and very few windows have people in.

It's on a Sunday, and central London is always genuinely quiet. If you want to find lots of people, look at more touristy places like the Southbank http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-33.2466...

Or from the Shard: http://static.guim.co.uk/interactivestore/2013/2/1/135968391...

Can you imagine if google acquired this company for street view?

BT = "British Telecom", it's not a small start up.

company != BT company == 360cities.net They already work with google blog.360cities.net/360-panorama-photos-google-earth/

Oh I see, when you zoom in enough, it transitions to an ultra-close shot. A little jarring, but you can see things much nicer that way.

This would be the ultimate "Where's Waldo?"

Found him!

http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=171.9737...

It is actually a "Where's Waldo?" in the picture. Find a big chicken called Buzby, win ipad and such for UK people only.. ;p

there's a half guy here: http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-46.0400... #BTTowerView

Seems like he can't keep up with his own self!

I found it rather creepy (yet cool) that I could easily read a number plate miles away.

is it just me? or can you actually spot a human being in this photo? It's an incredible image though!

I found some human beings pretty quickly. :)

Great, great image. Cool technology. But one question kept popping into my head: What if someone was sleeping naked in his/her bedroom?

Would it be blurred?

champagne ? :) http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=92.3363&...

Look kids! Big Ben! Parliament!

Kids aren't really a recognised London .... ohh sorry I see what you did there. ;)

where are the people ? No one seems to be living in any apartments.

Found a very poorly photoshopped seam right off the bat. Kind of sad for something claiming to be of such quality to go in and botch it like that. I'm sure it's covering something to keep people happy, but did you have to do it in such an ugly and obvious way?

This is to be expected from giant images like this that are assembled by automatically stitching together hundreds of smaller images. You'll see the similar artifacts or errors on sites like Google Maps, for example http://www.moillusions.com/2006/04/google-maps-haunted-road....

Reply on news.ycombinator.com