You are not logged in.

1

Sunday, January 30th 2011, 11:33pm

CUBE vs SPHERE

Hi ! does somebody know what is the difference between CUBE and SPHERE in terms of performance or display or... I don't know *tongue*


I mean, what are the advantages of using CUBE instead SPHERE? from the stitch process we obtain always an equirectangular image, and converting to cube is not only an extra step but also the panorama is bigger in file size terms.

I'm sure there are some advantages, but I don'nt know them.

2

Monday, January 31st 2011, 12:16am

Well, I think I found a difference...
In SPHERE vertical lines seems like doing a zig-zag sometimes, this doesn't happen in CUBE mode.
But I think SPHERE is running faster...

3

Tuesday, February 1st 2011, 2:29pm

Hi,

first as basic info - technically it's only possible to draw flat elements/surfaces,

that means a cubical pano, which is build of flat surfaces, can be drawn directly as it is,

but a spherical pano on the other side has a curved surface, so it is necessary to split that curved surface into many small flat surfaces to draw it, so the curved surface can only be approximated,

the number of 'splits' is defined by the details parameter, the higher this value is, the more accurate is the approximation, but also the slower the rendering is,

you can play and test interactively different details settings with the options plugin,
there you can also enable the showing of the internal faces to see how the pano is internally organized,

best regards,
Klaus

4

Wednesday, February 2nd 2011, 1:17pm

So... we have the advantage of "CUBE" faces only if we are using FP10 on and fisheye=0, am I right?
(because with FP10 off, or fisheye!=0, krpano needs to split the image into small triangles anyway...)

5

Wednesday, February 9th 2011, 4:41pm

Hi,

partially yes, the nadir and zenith areas are also better with cubes, because a sphere would need very much more triangles for good looking,

best regards,
Klaus