Quality for fullscreen and fast download

I searched through the forum and found some answers, but don't know if they're right for me.

I've got a virtual tour I completed in TW and need to downsize a bit for loading times. The images are spherical and large - 7-10mb. Is it still best to take those from the scene file and compressed them in PS? If so, which of the images or folders in the scene folder are being drawn from? The scene folder has two folders numbered 1 and 2 and a list of other image files that are like those in 1 and 2 but differ in file size.

Thanks in advance!

---

I was hoping someone had some answers as to how to get the file sizes down. I forged ahead with what I saw in the forums from two years ago - place the higher rez files in PS and compress. I compressed and they load faster, yet now another issue has arisen that I've never seen. In full screen mode the virtual tours smear in about 20% of the picture. It's as though the pixels lock and hold their form as it spins and does not reproduce the image. Then it releases. When I pull it down to the regular viewing screen the it all goes away. It's random in full screen and never happens in the smaller screen.

Any thoughts on what this is and how to correct it? The compressed files looked great in the tour until I resized.

---

Okay, so maybe I'm asking about cube-equi files instead of spherical. I'm new to this and don't understand how to best get those files sizes shrunk. I created the files in PTGui, did some editing in Pano2VR, and brought them over to TW to create the final product.

In what point of the process is it best to shrink the files down? If the TW is complete and I need to now shrink them what is the best practices for doing that?

Thanks!

---

Michael,

This can be involved so bare with me.

Tourweaver does not compress your "main" panorama image. So you need to make the decision before importing into Tourweaver.

If you are going to display fullscreen (in my opinion) you need a minimum of 4000x2000 pixel image in dimensions.

Compression of this image is relevant to and a restriction of the colour within the image. Some images will compress much harder (to end up smaller in file size) than others of the same pixel dimensions before showing obvious compression artifacts.

Now "if" you choose the Tourweaver publish option to show a reduced sized version of your "main" panorama image you can select say 50% of the original (2000x1000) because your smaller display (before going fullscreen where the "main" panorama image will be shown) say at a viewer window size of 640x480 or whatever you choose. You get the chance then to compress the "50%" version of the image (within Tourweaver) with the .jpg preview window and adjust the slider to suit your requirements but this ONLY affects the 50% version NOT the original imported panoramic image that will be used for fullscreen viewing.

This then will give you two folders within your PUBLISHED "source" folder named 1 and 2. Folder 1 contains the 50% compressed version for small/normal window display and the folder 2 has your panorama image you imported into Tourweaver uncompressed (although it gets renamed slightly) it will be the exact file size (weight) as imported.

OK, if you can get your head around my explanation then you should be heading in the right direction.

How do you compress and resize an image to meet a target goal? I personally recommend a program called KissMyImage www.kissmyimage.com because it is the only program that lets you set the maximum files size target required. It also resizes and does it in a correct mathematical way.

What is a good size for a panorama image per scene? That is a hard one because you must allow for download speed vs customers exceptions vs viewing quality. I believe for a "tour" you should be aiming at under 2mb per 4000x2000 image with 1 - 1.5mb optimal. For single (non tour) panoramas I think 3mb is a fair target at 6000x3000 pixel dimension.

Remember "if" you have gone with the smaller 50% viewer for your small/normal webpage view the end user doesn't download the fullscreen larger files unless they choose to view the scene/s fullscreen. Meaning no bandwidth wastage and faster downloads etc.

The style of image (cubes or spherical) imported makes no difference to the file size.

It is possible to re-compress a panorama image "after" publishing. This is the image in the 2 folder. You can open in Photoshop or KissMyImage (compress) and replace it back into the folder just be sure to keep the (exact) same file name. It is NOT possible to resize this image after publishing because it will destroy the hotspot positions.

Warning: Must not be saved as a progressive .jpg only baseline.

I hope this makes sense and gets you on the right track.

Regards, Smooth

---

Thanks for this explanation Smooth.
I have been loading my pano's at 5K x 2500 @ 1.5mb max.
If I want a better image at full screen should I be loading my 5K x 2500 at say 3mb and then select the 50% viewer for the smaller images?

---

Nikon D300, D3s, Nikon 10.5 lens, RingT105N+Footplate+MrotatorTCPs, Giottos MT9261 Tripod, Manfrotto 410 Jr geared head.

If you know the "secret" then everyday is a good day!

Jerry,

You could yes!

But understand that 5000x2500 at 3mb will give a great image for fullscreen but you are forcing people to download 3mb for every fullscreen image they "choose" to view. If you have 6 scenes that's 18mb + any of the 50% views they take in. So 20mb will not take long to add up. You are also doubling the download time from 1.5mb to 3mb.

It is a great option that easypano introduced allowing us to have 2 resolutions for each scene. Lets face it sometimes you just don't want to see fullscreen but a quite happy to flick through the 50% versions for a general "see if I'm interested" look (even more so with real estate).

You could go to 40% of the 5000x2500 and still have 2000x1000 for the small/normal viewer.

In the "old days" like a few years back we were all using 1400x700 in java viewers of 400x300 or even 500x375 so 2000x1000 is plenty good enough for 640x480 or even 800x600 or similar variants on your typical webpage.

We also use to say that the image should be 2 1/2 times the viewer window hight as a guide.

Regards, Smooth

---