Skip to navigation

PCPro-Computing in the Real World Printed from www.pcpro.co.uk

Register to receive our regular email newsletter at http://www.pcpro.co.uk/registration.

The newsletter contains links to our latest PC news, product reviews, features and how-to guides, plus special offers and competitions.

// Home / Blogs

Posted on August 22nd, 2008 by Matthew Sparkes

Microsoft releases Photosynth, but we can’t get synthy

Microsoft has finally launched its Photosynth software to the public, after teasing us with it since way back in 2006. I’ve been thoroughly impressed by all of the demonstrations in the last two years, featuring gorgeous shots from the BBC, National Geographic and NASA, and have been waiting desperately to try it myself.

Microsoft claims it can take any collection of images of the same object or location, and mesh them into a panorama/3Dish model. You can pan and zoom around one of these models, and different images will be laid together to provide more context and detail. It works fantastically well in the examples I’ve seen until now, such as this collection of images from Stonehenge.

Well, it was released yesterday, and I’ve had a go at creating a couple of “synths” myself. Sadly, I’m not impressed.

A lot of the demonstrations I’d seen used buildings, landscapes and other huge objects as their subject, so I roped in our 6’ 4” staff writer Mike Jennings for an impromptu photo shoot.

For my first attempt I got quite creative, taking 22 photos from every conceivable angle, but all of Mike, in the same pose and location, and all under the same lighting conditions. Uploading all of these shots I found that my “synth” was only 29% “synthy”, Microsoft’s measure of how many images it manages to mesh together. Viewing this was jumpy and disorientating, and had none of the smooth flow that the Microsoft demonstrations had.

I tried again, in better lighting conditions, and limited myself to pictures of Mike’s front – the common viewpoint should make it easier for the software to mesh them together, I thought. I also shot more photos, to give it more data to go on. Unfortunately, these 28 photos created only a 19% synthy synth, which is far less synthy than my first synth.

Perhaps I’m doing something wrong, but Microsoft claims that this is a simple tool which anyone with a point and shoot digital camera can take advantage of. So far, that’s not my experience. In fact, for the first 24 hours after its launch my experience was not being able to log in at all because the service was down.

I’m going to persevere and see if I can get some better results, but so far I’m disappointed by what looked set to be one of the more exciting products to emerge from Microsoft in recent years.

Tags: ,

Posted in: Random

Permalink | Trackback

Follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

7 Responses to “ Microsoft releases Photosynth, but we can’t get synthy ”

  1. Simon Jones Says:
    August 22nd, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    Photosynth works well on architecture because it looks for sharp edges and angles – things rather prevalent in buildings but not in people.

    Try again with general shots of the office or the building from outside and you should get better results. Twenty shots really is at the lower limit of usefulness for Photosynth. You need 50+ shots for good results and from different perspectives and distances from the subject.

     
  2. cp Says:
    August 25th, 2008 at 2:04 am

    Photosynth doesn’t seem to be designed for the use to which you’ve tried to put it. Every demo I’ve seen shows it as a means of combine pictures of locations to get a spatial sense of a building, or street, or some other large area. It seems a little pointless complaining that it can’t do something it was never meant for.

     
  3. paul Says:
    August 28th, 2008 at 7:17 am

    What is the point of this software? It can’t add detail that isn’t in the original data, so does it just allow you to zoom in and out and swirl stuff around? If so, who gives a toss? I can take a digital movie on my phone and manipulate that any way i want, using any half decent movie package. I think i can smell a solution desperately scrabbling for a problem…

     
  4. Simon Jones Says:
    August 28th, 2008 at 7:55 am

    If you make a movie, you direct where the camera points & zooms and the sequence in which the images appear. You’re also limited to video resolutions.

    Photosynth lets you stitch hundreds or thousands of still images together, even from multiple contributors. Stills have much better resolutions and the viewer gets to choose what to see and in what order.

    It is a novel way to view collections of photographs. It may or may not catch on but the “Seadragon” AKA “Deep Zoom” technology and the way Photosynth calculates spatial arrangements from images have serious applications in many different fields.

     
  5. Tony Coleby Says:
    August 28th, 2008 at 10:03 am

    Admittedly it is still Beta but I expected less “seam” between the photos, making it look less like a collection of images and more a single 3D dataset. Guess we’re spoiled these days though. Moon on a stick…

     
  6. paul Says:
    August 28th, 2008 at 11:00 am

    I can understand the scientific fraternity may be interested, but for mainstream use it sounds as if it will fall into the ‘novel eyecandy’ slot, where it may attract some attention but limited use. How many average users have hundreds of stills of the same building or area? Joe public mostly takes photos of friends and pet dogs – not office blocks. Digital video is getting better, resolutions are up, storage prices going down, who needs software that tries to emulate a movie from a bunch of stills, when you could just shoot a movie?

    NB My screensaver gives me a lovely display of my holiday snaps, complete with whirly effects and fade-ins. Didn’t cost me a penny, either..

     
  7. Michael Tyas Says:
    December 31st, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    You won’t have much luck with a human subject. Photosynth works only with static object. Simple movements of your subject, such as breathing, blinking or straightening the back, would jar it out of sync with the other photos.

     

Leave a Reply

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

* required fields

* Will not be published

SEARCH
SIGN UP

Your email:

Your password:

remember me

advertisement


Hitwise Top 10 Website 2010