Dubai 45 gigapixels

By:Gerald Donovan (gddxb) on April 23, 2010
Tags: None

*** Hold the front page ***

Someone found Waldo!

http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/48492/snapshots/159517/

***

*** New: The making of video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwASw5KJwX8

***

This was only ever intended to be a technical test - I'm making no claims with regards photographic quality or artistic merit!

It was more about exploring the limits of both the hardware and software that is available out there.

(If you want to see other photographs I've taken of Dubai, that depending on your view may or may not have slightly more artistic qualities, please do check out my pages on Smugmug at http://gddxb.smugmug.com )

Air quality is not at its best at this time of year in Dubai (this was shot on the morning of 23rd April), and you have to work with what you're given.

4,250 individual shots taken with a Canon 7D and the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L zoom at 400mm. Total shooting time circa 3 hours 30 minutes, in 37C heat (that's the temperature in the shade - the camera and lens were almost too hot to touch at the end of this).

Gigapan EPIC Pro.

Autopano Giga software.

Gigapan uploader.

PC - i7-920, 12GB RAM, 2x 300GB Velociraptors (not RAID). On attempting to stitch this the first time, I was told I needed just over a terabyte of scratch space, so I had to go out and buy a 2TB disk and install that as well!

Power and storage:
Amazingly, both the battery in the Gigapan and the one in the 7D lasted out. I had spare camera batteries with me, so wasn't really worried on that front, but I didn't know what to expect from the Gigapan's. My previous record from it was around 3,000 images (across two separate panoramas).

All 4,250 images (.jpg only) managed to fit on a single 32GB CF card, taking up 27.5 GB.

HUGE thanks to South Korean property developer Bando Construction and Engineering for making available the location to shoot this from - Ubora Towers in Business Bay, Dubai.

*edited the date taken field as it was showing the date the stitching was completed, and not the date the photos were taken.*

Date Taken: April 23, 2010
Date Added: May 2, 2010
Bookmarked: 29 times
Total Views: 2023369 views
Snapshots: 858
Size: 44.88 gigapixels
Field of View: 243.3 degrees wide, 0.0 degrees high

		May 2, 2010 15:35	Flag as inappropriate
		Give some specifications on the equipment used and the stitching details. Great shot...we hope you had sufficient bandwith during the upload! Rather poor air quality by the look of it. Posted by Darbs

		May 2, 2010 16:09	Flag as inappropriate
		Great shot Gerald, a really impressive view. Pity your not able to fine tune the image in KRO format :( maybe one day. Posted by SuperZoom

		May 2, 2010 16:59	Flag as inappropriate
		may be I am wrong ... But it is a world record (2010.05.01) on gigapixels? Posted by aramarfoz

		May 2, 2010 17:08	Flag as inappropriate
		I believe this is a new world record for pixels! The previous was those of Paris 26 Gigapixels http://www.paris-26-gigapixels.com/index-en.html Posted by Darbs

		May 3, 2010 13:40	Flag as inappropriate
		Congratulations on capturing, stitching, and uploading this monster image. I would love to learn more about how you overcame different challenges. In the future I would use a 300mm f2.8 with a1.4x teleconverter stopped down to at least f8 to f11. The lens that you used usually exhibits significant vignetting that is difficult to rectify using the peripheral illumination on the Canon 7D. It is also good that you immediately communicate that this is not an artistic image and that the atmospheric conditions are not the best. Though if you do not perform this excercise you would not be ready when you have that golden opportunity. Great job and I would love to hear from you about your experience doing this : ) Posted by Castillonis

		May 3, 2010 13:55	Flag as inappropriate
		Hi Castillonis - Oh that I could afford a 300mm f/2.8! I can only work with what I have, and I just do this for fun. When I do have another go - which probably won't be until October or November (the air quality here will be terrible until then), I'll probably look to borrow a 500mm f/4.0 from Canon Middle East and do a 360 degree pano from the crows nest on a crane on top of the building - I reckon that should deliver something close to 100GP. These images were taken at f/11 1/800th at ISO 320. You're right - it is important to stress that this is a purely technical exercise, and it's also worth mentioning the huge effect the high temperatures have on image quality due to the heat haze. If only the Gigapan Pro had come out 6 months earlier! Until November then ;) ... Posted by gddxb

		May 3, 2010 14:07	Flag as inappropriate
		The Canon 500mm f4 is an excellent lens and it works well with the 1.4x teleconverter at f11. You need to enable mirror lockup in your camera at that focal length. I completely understand the resource issue. I rented the Canon 500mm f4 for 14 days and it cost me a pretty penny. You should definitely talk to Canon to see if they would loan you a lens. The 500mm does not have vignetting issues like the 100-400mm. The 300mm is also a very nice lens. Posted by Castillonis

		May 3, 2010 14:43	Flag as inappropriate
		i'd love to see this stitched using MSR ICE and uploaded to the Photosynth site. The viewer is much smoother. Posted by jdughi

		May 3, 2010 15:25	Flag as inappropriate
		Only because on this scale it makes a bit of difference, change your ISO increments to be 1:1 stops. Any sensors other than the EOS-1 series sensors only have native stops of 1:1. All other Canons use processing to boost up or down from the native stop. In this case, ISO 400 processed to look like 320. Posted by wwing49

		May 3, 2010 20:17	Flag as inappropriate
		jdughi - I tried stitching this with ICE, but despite MS's claims for its ability to deal with practically unlimited size panoramas, it crashed. Posted by gddxb

		May 3, 2010 21:31	Flag as inappropriate
		An astonishing achievement in its own right, but you seem to have done this on your own unlike other world records that used teams of people iirc. What were the specifications of the computer you used? Also, please geocode! Posted by Kilgore661

		May 4, 2010 00:01	Flag as inappropriate
		Hi Kilgore661 - Thanks for the kind comments. I've added basic PC spec, and also geo-coded. Posted by gddxb

		May 4, 2010 09:17	Flag as inappropriate
		This is cool, good job, but its not in 3D! Darn, my record setting image only lasted on the top for 10 short days, come on everybody, lets get a 50 gigapixel image, but in 3D! How so many views, 200,000 in one day! And all these comments. Makes me feel like sliced cheese. Well here is my shameless self promotion of the second largest Gigapan, in 3D http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/47924/ Posted by odyssey

		May 4, 2010 09:30	Flag as inappropriate
		This is cool, good job, but its not in 3D! Darn, my record setting image only lasted on the top for 10 short days, come on everybody, lets get a 50 gigapixel image, but in 3D! How so many views, 200,000 in one day! And all these comments. Makes me feel like sliced cheese. Well here is my shameless self promotion of the second largest Gigapan, in 3D http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/47924/ Posted by odyssey

		May 4, 2010 17:23	Flag as inappropriate
		Among the other BIGGEST THINGS Dubai just got the biggest gigapan. This is finlly something worth to see. You did a nice job. Hope will repeat the similar at the better weather. What is dimension of the pano in pixels. After this Photoshop should think of its limitations, publishing CS5. After this thinking of what are the limitations of Autopano. :) Posted by zefart

		May 5, 2010 09:25	Flag as inappropriate
		The physics does not fit here. The sensor of the 7D is known. At 220 degrees HFOV possible only 240,000 pixels are horizontal. 44.88 Gigapixel mean height of 180 degrees. There are now only 45 degrees. What is wrong? Sorry for my bad english. ;:o) Posted by hschulze

		May 5, 2010 10:02	Flag as inappropriate
		Hi hschulze - The 220 degree width was a guestimate as I had to enter it when geo-coding. Fortunately, I took a screenshot of the render preview in Autopano Giga which I've just checked back on. The FOV given by Autopano Giga is 243.3 x 46.19 degrees, which I will update in the description here now. Not sure how you're calculating a 240,000 pixel width - are you taking into account the crop factor of the sensor? The only place I can see the pixel dimensions is in the render preview (obviously I can't open this anywhere), which reports a width of 472,603 pixels. Assuming you've missed off the crop factor, and 240k for 220 degrees would be correct if it were full frame, 240k/220*243.3*1.6 would give a width of 425,000 pixels - 90% of the number reported by Autopano Giga. Presumably the projection of what is actually a 3-dimensional spherical image onto a flat plane is accountable for the additional 10%. Posted by gddxb

		May 5, 2010 10:32	Flag as inappropriate
		The physics look sound, this image is 47,2603x94,955 in dimension, so at 220 degrees width, that would be 44.2 degrees high. That is 44 Billion Pixels! But lets consider the ramifications of the math, according to the L-curve website that the median US income is $40,000 and Microsoft's Bill Gates greatest annual income was estimated at about 45 Billion. So in photographic perspective, the Median Income American is shooting with a .04 Megapixel Camera of income (230 pixels by 173 pixels = 40,000 pixels @$1 per pixel) and Bill Gates is shooting with this 44 Billion Pixel camera - about a Million times greater resolution than the Median Americans camera! Would 44 Billion US Dollars be enough to buy all the real estate seen in this Gigapan? Posted by odyssey

		May 5, 2010 10:51	Flag as inappropriate
		The physics is correct, the image is 472,603x94,955 in dimension, so at 220 degree width, that would be 44.2 degrees in height. Consider the dimensions of this enormous panorama, 472,603 x 94,955 is 44,876,017,865 pixels, or about 45 Billion Pixels. As Dubai is about money, if each pixel of this panorama was worth $1 US, would there be enough pixels to finance all the construction shown in this image? Consider this amount of capital, according to the L-curve website http://www.lcurve.org, the Median US Annual Income is $40,000 - again giving $1 per pixel to put this in photographic perspective, that is like annually being able to shoot an image that is only .04 Megapixels, or .00004 Gigapixels in resolution (a snapshot 230 pixels x173 pixels). Microsoft's Bill Gates has had an estimated 45 Billion Dollar maximum annual increase in net worth, so he could save his money up for one year and purchase all the pixels in this image at $1 each pixel, it is like he is shooting with a 45 Billion pixel camera, about one million times the resolution of the 'Average American Snap-shooter'! Talk about getting the big picture! Posted by odyssey

		May 5, 2010 11:26	Flag as inappropriate
		Thanks for the explanation. Now I have understood it. :o) Posted by hschulze

		May 5, 2010 12:22	Flag as inappropriate
		While pondering the financing of building Dubai, I find out that the tower in the center, now the worlds tallest building, was about 1 billion dollars, with the surrounding buildings in 2km base being about a 4 billion dollar investment. But at what human cost? This site paints a very different picture of the toils of the construction workers at ex-pats http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html I would not be so fast to admire Dubai without thinking about how and by whom it is being built and their working and living conditions and predicament. Posted by odyssey

		May 5, 2010 18:34	Flag as inappropriate
		Nice work! Thanks for trying out ICE at jdughi's suggestion. As one of ICE's developers, I'd like to know more about the crash. If you'd like to help, please email us (hdview at microsoft dot com) or post to the ICE forum (http://community.research.microsoft.com/forums/112.aspx) with some details: was ICE stitching or exporting or publishing; how much progress did it make; did you get an error code; was it 32-bit or 64-bit ICE; what OS are you running; how much memory and temp disk space? Thanks! --Eric Microsoft Research Posted by ericsto

		May 5, 2010 21:20	Flag as inappropriate
		Congrats Gerald. Thanks for raising the bar - another challenge. Big question - Power Source & image storage Did you have an external power source for the Canon 7D? What about the Epic Pro? - several batteries, or did you have an external power source for it, too? How did you store the images as they were taken? large CF card(s), or directly onto an external drive? .jpg? Posted by Apapane

		May 6, 2010 04:07	Flag as inappropriate
		Hi Apapane - Thanks for the suggestion - meant to add this a while ago but forgot. Power and memory comments added to the description. Regards, Gerald. Posted by gddxb

		May 6, 2010 13:44	Flag as inappropriate
		Great work Gerald! How long did it take to render the pano? Posted by vollwertmedia

		May 6, 2010 13:48	Flag as inappropriate
		Great work Gerald! How long did it take to render the pano? Posted by vollwertmedia

		May 6, 2010 17:17	Flag as inappropriate
		*** ICE update *** Contrary to my earlier response to jdughi, ICE didn't crash - it gave an error code indicating it had run out of disk space (although I wasn't aware of this at the time). I'm re-running ICE with 2TB of temp space to see what happens. Posted by gddxb

		May 6, 2010 17:25	Flag as inappropriate
		Show de imagens e tecnologia e visual essa cidade Parabéns!!! Posted by FlamePix

		May 6, 2010 18:02	Flag as inappropriate
		A photographic representation of the difference between 45 thousand pixels and 45 billion pixels (see my previous comment about median US income vs Bill Gates maximal income) can be made with this link i(Dubai Gigapan at 45 thousand pixels .00045 Gigapixels http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/48492-473x95.jpg ) Compare its resolution to that of the whole Gigapan - at $1 per pixel, that is the difference between the average American's earning power and Bill Gates. The average Dubia construction worker imported from India or Bangladesh works 15 hour days in this hot sun for 500 Dubai Dirhams a month ($1,634 US a year), at $1 per pixel, his camera would only take an image 90x18 pixels on a side http://www.gigapan.org/gigapans/48492-90x18.jpg The average American earns 28 times a construction worker in Dubai, and Bill Gates makes one million times the average American or 28 million times more than a Dubiai construction worker. If you took his yearly 45 billion dollars in clean new $100 bills and stacked them on top of each other (thinwise, not lengthwise) it would reach a whopping 30 miles (50 kilometers) into the sky beyond the stratosphere. A average Americans $45K stack would be a mere 1.8 inches tall, and the Dubai construction workers stack would less than a tenth of an inch tall! Check out the website http://www.lcurve.org to really understand this math! and read about the dark side of Dubai http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html Posted by odyssey

		May 7, 2010 23:18	Flag as inappropriate
		Very impressive. Just read an article about your work on Germany's biggest newspaper website! I like the depth of sharpness. Posted by Fisch

		May 8, 2010 02:13	Flag as inappropriate
		This pano is absolutely fantastic. Well done, Gerald. Posted by payam195r

		May 10, 2010 10:17	Flag as inappropriate
		How did you generate a PSB file over 300.000px wide? I thought that the PSB limit was 300.000px!!! Posted by germangonzalezgarrido

		May 10, 2010 13:29	Flag as inappropriate
		Where is Waldo? EXTREME EDITION. Posted by Nekhekt

		May 10, 2010 15:57	Flag as inappropriate
		awesome picture ... horrible experience ! should have used silverlight deepzoom .... it would have worked so much better .. Posted by dokteriq

		May 11, 2010 01:43	Flag as inappropriate
		@dokteriq - As far as I'm aware, the Microsoft tools can't take a .kro file as a source. I did attempt to stitch this with ICE, but despite providing it with the matrix layout of the photos, it messed up the stitching. (I'll probably get in touch with the ICE guys and see if there's anything they can do to help, but I'm a bit busy with other things at the moment.) Posted by gddxb

		May 11, 2010 01:45	Flag as inappropriate
		@germangonzalezgarrido - I know we've discussed this on the private messaging, but for the benefit of others: Photoshop wasn't involved in the process. Autopano Giga produced a .kro file, for which as far as I'm aware there is not a hard-coded pixel limit. This .kro file was then passed to the Gigapan Uploader which tiled it and uploaded circa 1,000,000 jpegs to the Gigapan servers. Posted by gddxb

		May 12, 2010 01:39	Flag as inappropriate
		A truly amazing image to behold, however, the cynical side of me wonders, in the spirit of technical testing, how difficult it would be to infuse an in-focus image of foreground objects like the railing and balcony in order to render the image perfectly in an aesthetic sense. Posted by agnosticactivist

		May 12, 2010 13:08	Flag as inappropriate
		I saw your video of the capture and I have two recommendations. One, is to use a circular polarizer. Two is to use a row pattern instead of a column pattern. The movements in pitch require the most settling time, so using a row pattern would only require pitch movements at the end of a row. Yaw movements require less settling time. At longer focal lengths enabling mirror flipup is also very beneficial. Posted by Castillonis

		May 17, 2010 01:14	Flag as inappropriate
		Wooow!!! Fantastic!!!!!! Greetings from Mexico Posted by RS_Camaleon

		May 17, 2010 08:16	Flag as inappropriate
		@Castillonis - Many thanks for the helpful suggestions. I'll be sure to use them all when I take the "proper" panorama towards the end of the year :) Posted by gddxb

		May 19, 2010 12:37	Flag as inappropriate
		Great job! Could you please tell us how long it took to stitch it? Posted by Silverman

		May 21, 2010 22:56	Flag as inappropriate
		Would be nice to write the list of your equipment you used for this project. Posted by kombizz

		May 21, 2010 22:58	Flag as inappropriate
		great project with interesting good quality. Posted by kombizz

		May 22, 2010 18:56	Flag as inappropriate
		awesome, great work Posted by Scar

		May 23, 2010 07:40	Flag as inappropriate
		@dokteriq - You can view the panorama in HDView here: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/hdview/preview/default.html Select the Dubai 45 Gigapixel link on the right hand side, then go full screen for the best experience. Posted by gddxb

		May 31, 2010 08:08	Flag as inappropriate
		In the far left part of the picture few cm on right side there are two cranes in the front of twin towers . The right side crane has on the top the little house for operating the crane with txt on it POTAIN and MULTIPLEX , and the POTAIN part operating room has a ladies poster on the door!!!!!:) Wov YOU ARE THE MAN with this photo! Bravo from a small photo club in Serbia "Pannonia" Jozef K Posted by atirudra

		June 5, 2010 02:13	Flag as inappropriate
		Great Work! Impressive. One question, Does anybody know how I can view panoramas locally on any computer without the need of Gigapa.org or GigaPan Stich? Thank you . Karim Posted by karimsaad

		June 5, 2010 13:00	Flag as inappropriate
		@karimsaad: Try using Microsoft Research's Image Composite Editor (ICE). You can download it for free from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/ice/ Use the "New Structured Pano" feature to stitch a set of photos taken with a GigaPan device, then export using the Deep Zoom format to get a great viewing experience from local disk. Or publish to the Photosynth web site for a good viewing experience online. Please give us feedback on ICE using our forum at http://community.research.microsoft.com/forums/112.aspx Posted by ericsto

		June 5, 2010 14:31	Flag as inappropriate
		@ericsto Thanks a lot Eric. Will check it and let you know. Cheers, K. Posted by karimsaad

		June 22, 2010 13:47	Flag as inappropriate
		Why do you flatly refuse to say how long it took to stitch? We know that it must have taken a long time but we would really like to know HOW long. Posted by Silverman

		June 22, 2010 13:56	Flag as inappropriate
		@Silverman - Hi. Got your message by email, but can't see it here. Odd. Might be because I'm on an iPad. Who knows? Anyway - to answer your question, I can't actually remember exactly how long it took to render. I think it was of the order of 24-48 hours or so, but that was without any smart blending (hence why there are so many "ghosts" in the image). Posted by gddxb

		July 5, 2010 16:24	Flag as inappropriate
		WOW! This is unbelievably impressive. Really great that you used a gigapan as well. Print @ 300 DPI and cover a building... Posted by JIHBird

		July 24, 2010 07:34	Flag as inappropriate
		And the new world record goes to Vienna with 50 Gigapixel, (404864x124832 Pixel, stitched from more than 3600 images) See it here: http://photoartkalmar.com/Photoart Kalmar high res/Gigapixel/index.html Posted by gigapanbot

		July 24, 2010 07:38	Flag as inappropriate
		@gigapanbot Sorry to be the one to break it to you... http://gigapan.org/gigapans/54825/ Posted by gddxb

		August 1, 2010 17:24	Flag as inappropriate
		GRRRREAT SHOT... well great job... shooting is easy with gigapan! great stitching! epic100 has a battery problem...but I work with extra rechargeable batteries... do you need any special permission to shot in Dubai? is so,m where is issued? SEE YA Posted by fsaldana

		August 16, 2010 10:07	Flag as inappropriate
		I appreciate the technical overview you provide on YouTube. I would like to add that link to my Art show found at http://www.youtube.com/user/stephenpaulwest#p/u/8/w5igNIH3mQw My show was simply an overview of the wonderful artistic ability of this technology, and it would be nice to include a more technical video link for my viewers. Is it possible to link to your video? Stephen Paul West. Posted by spw0766