ggpkg degraded quality

Q&A about the latest versions
Post Reply
eshaw
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 am

I've noticed that when I render panoramas as a ggpkg, the quality is significantly degraded compared with the Flash and HTML5 (normal) outputs. Has anyone else experienced this or know how to fix it?
For all three outputs, I set the Cube Face to 2880px, the Image Quality to 80, and the window to 1024x768px, no multiresolution. The ggpkg version is visibly much more compressed than the other two. I've attached two details of the same area of marble floor seen at the same level of zoom, one from the Flash file, the other from the ggpkg, for comparison.
Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer!
Attachments
Floor-ggpkg.png
Floor-ggpkg.png (121.45 KiB) Viewed 4583 times
Floor-Flash.png
Floor-Flash.png (150.4 KiB) Viewed 4583 times
User avatar
360Texas
Moderator
Posts: 3684
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:06 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas USA
Contact:

Maybe you might revisit your sharpening interpolation filter settings.

FILE | Settings | Images tab

I have set our interpolation filter to : Lanczos3

It takes a few seconds longer to process but our imaging is definitely sharper.

Sharpening jpegs to many times (in-camera,stitching, Photoshop, and then again in Pano2vr) often injects jpeg compression artifacts. We recommend never using .jpg's. We also do not use .png's

We start with in-camera RAW, convert to non-compressed .tif's 16bit, then stitch with PTgui output to tif 16bit, and finally Pano2vr Lanczos3 sharpening followed by setting your cube face size large enough to maintain high quality with little or no compression.

But then this might not be the answer to your question.
Dave
Pano2VR Forum Global Moderator
Image
Visit 360texas.com
eshaw
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 am

I appreciate the help, but sadly, this doesn't answer my question. We too always use tiffs (though usually 8bit). I've played around with the different interpolation filters, and you're right that this very well may help. But if all the outputs were created with the same filter, I don't see why the ggpkg would be so much more compressed than the Flash.
User avatar
k.ary.n
Gnome
Posts: 615
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 1:02 pm

Hi!
Are these screenshots taken from the published panoramas? Technically, there shouldn't be any difference in output quality but perhaps the CMS treats them differently.
eshaw
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 am

Hi k.ary.n
Nope, these are not from the published panoramas, just from my desktop. They look like this both locally and published.
User avatar
JimWatters
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:16 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick
Contact:

I just did a test and the resulting cube faces I got were the exact same.
Your non packaged versions of HTML5 an Flash booth have the same quality?
Can you extract the image files from the ggpkg file and compare them to the HTML5 and Flash to see if they are the same dimensions and file size?
Maybe you enabled Tile Quality for the floor and it is set to something quite a bit lower than Image Quality?
eshaw
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 am

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the tip! I checked it out, and all the images are exactly the same dimensions, resolution, and file size. Image and Tile quality are both set to 80 for all outputs and in all directions.

On further inspection, I think that the ggpkg version just isn't loading the 2880 tile images properly, and is only displaying the 800 or 400 tiles. Could this be possible? I'm uploading the two xmls here. Can anyone tell what I and/or the program are doing wrong in the ggpkg version (file name beginning in "drupal")?
Attachments
drupal_1314_istanbul2013_hagiasofia_vr_04.xml
(2.99 KiB) Downloaded 149 times
1314_istanbul2013_hagiasofia_vr_04.xml
(2.83 KiB) Downloaded 158 times
User avatar
JimWatters
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:16 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick
Contact:

It looks like you may have tracked down the problem. Can you try increasing the Window size of 1024x768px so it is larger than the alternative size of 1025.
eshaw
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 am

It worked! I just got rid of the mobile sizes for the ggpkg version, and that fixed the problem. Thanks so much for suggesting this!
Post Reply