Once again, Microsoft takes a poor idea and runs with it. It never ceases to amaze me that up in Redmond they pay people good money to do such work.
Not that I have anything against tiled projections. Printing dodecahedral panoramas seems quite popular, there are several programs for that. On the flickr MathMap group you can see many beautiful examples, many by Seb, of not just polyhedral tilings but all sorts of curved tesselations of the sphere, displaying spherical images. I keep suggesting that our primary stitching targets should include the cube, since so many of our panos end up that way. It would be only a little extra work to make an engine for that do the TOAST and Pierce Quincuncial projections too. -- Tom On Dec 17, 8:18 am, kfj <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16 Dez., 15:50, Seb Perez-D <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 15:48, Sebastien Perez-Duarte > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > A much better projection is the Peirce Quincuncial. It is also square, > > > but is almost everywhere conformal. > > > Sorry, I forgot the Wikipedia link! > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peirce_quincuncial_projection > > Hey, I really like this projection! You're right, it has more > aesthetic appeal than TOAST. > > Kay -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
