Comments on: Record-Breaking 320 Gigapixel Image Taken of London

By: Wolfgang Manns

Wolfgang Manns — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:38:00 +0000

here it is …..

By: Wolfgang Manns

Wolfgang Manns — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:34:00 +0000

Great ….. There’s a stitching error about 5 miles left of the scyscrapers area …….

By: Braden Storrs

Braden Storrs — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:54:00 +0000

Most probably won’t say anything. They have all but lost privacy in that country. They have the most saturated CCTV system in the world with 1 camera per 14 people. 1984…

By: Jason Lei

Jason Lei — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:00:00 +0000

… found half a car… it’s as if they tried to clone the car out, but forgot about it. Oh and next to it, half a garbage truck… well to be exact half of it’s tray.

By: Jesse K

Jesse K — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 05:36:00 +0000

What’s up with certain people disappearing once a certain zoom level is reached but absolutely NOTHING changes around them? Not even other people’s movements… Serious Photoshop skills???

By: Richard Steinberger

Richard Steinberger — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 02:08:00 +0000

Awesome, thanks for fixing it. That’s just unreal…

By: cknight84

cknight84 — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 01:52:00 +0000

Thanks for the catch…the link has been fixed.

By: David Harrison

David Harrison — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 01:05:00 +0000

The link is to the previous record, which was held by the same people, but a smaller image.

By: Richard Steinberger

Richard Steinberger — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:17:00 +0000

In the description of the image it says: This is an 80-gigapixel panoramic photo, made from 7886 individual images. This panorama was shot from the top of the Centre Point building in central London, in the summer of 2010. ” Where did you get “By stitching together 48,640 individual frames, a new image, taken for the BT Tower in London, has broken the record for the largest panorama in the world.” ??

By: Debbie Davies

Debbie Davies — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:56:00 +0000

Technically amazing. But when Google released Street View everyone was screaming invasion of privacy. I wonder why this is not subject to the same restrictions.