Member Discussion

Does Panoramic Stitching Look Better Than Dewarping?

Given the same total AOV and total MP, a single imager sensor dewarped camera should have the same FOV/resolution as a stitched multi view camera. But does it?

Does anyone know of any images or footage which show the same entire scene, with both technologies?

Multi-imager cameras typically don't stitch.

And they also never have exactly the same FoV as multi-imagers usually have a dead spot directly beneath the camera.

See tests on Scallop Panoramic Cameras and Testing Arecont Omni

Multi-imager cameras typically don't stitch

Is that because typically multi-imager cameras are Arecont?

The Scallop that you linked to does, shown below:

And the new DW does.  Acti has a 40MP stitching model.

But I assumed Arecont did, especially with all the patent talk... 

What exactly is immersive viewing?  Endless 360 vPTZ?

Arecont and Avigilon. And since Arecont is 80%+ of the multi-imager market..

Stitching may or may not be more usable but it does not increase quality.

The DW only puts out 1920 x 1080 max.

I don't believe the ACTi is shipping yet.

Stitching may or may not be more usable but it does not increase quality

By that argument neither does dewarping, it only makes a stream more 'usable' to our non-panoramic brains. But the image 'quality' is inherent in the original. Also panoramic stitching has a modest amount of dewarping to eliminate pin-cushion distortion at the "stitch".

Anyway, let me put it this way, if somebody asked you which of two panoramic cameras to buy, with all the specs being the same except one had 4 imagers with a stitched view and the other 1 imager with a dewarped view, would you have a preference?

You can't seriously comparing the 'dewarping' involved with stitching 4 cameras side by side with fisheye dewarping. But I guess you are.

In any event, multi-imager panoramics. For two reasons, one because it's easier to hit higher resolutions by putting 4 cameras side by side and, two, because most applications really need 180 only, not a full 360, so multi-imager 'concentrates' the pixels far more effectively.