New composite of the ruined Earth

Many of you will have seen a popular composite image from the last minute of Revelations that puts together the various part of the sets and mattes for the ruined Earth. (And yes, all producer comments since then have pretty much confirmed this is Earth, so why the ruins look so recent remains a mystery.) I have some fancier stitching tools, so I put together a larger image that shows a lot more of the scene for you.

Because this shot was done with a tracking camera and various other moves, it is not easy to produce a perfectly clean montage, and this one thus bends down to the left, but you can still look at it just fine. However it has much cleaner blends than the earlier image, does not have the logos and as noted, covers a lot more of the picture. You should note that the main foreground ruins are the “Temple of Aurora” (described as being on Earth), as cited in this auction page for the foam core model of the ruins.

Click on the thumbnail to see the large image:

Note that when you click to the actual image, your browser may shrink it to fit in your window. It’s actually much bigger, so if you click in it, it should expand it so you can scroll around. Thanks to a new tool, AutoPanoPro, for helping stitch this. I have been using it for the latest panoramas on my panorama site.

Bandwidth

This probably isn't the topic to ask, Brad, but I'm looking at starting my own blog with the odd comment and photograph like yours and wondered what sort of bandwidth you chew up per month. I'm not expecting to hit more that a couple of hundred at most but am just asking around the online folks I read regularly to see what the ballpark might be.

I just got a digital camera for personal use for the first time only recently. It's only a compact but has manual controls, so is good for learning and getting used to things. I've played with doing some quick and dirty panorama shots. They're not as good as your stuff and I'm not organised enough at the moment to have done something like your BSG shot but it looks like fun.

Not much

Just about any web site hosting service you choose should do fine. You could probably get away with plain old web hosting in the cheap variety, or a virtual server. I have a fancier server but I have multiple sites and lots of traffic. I don’t come close to the bandwidth limits though.

That's reassuring

I keep a daily diary and the average of the past few years even stored in the fat .doc format doesn't take up much space, and I'll only ever put a sample of stuff online. Certainly, not much more than you. I like taking photos at the best resolution. They're pretty fat but just checking the stuff I've uploaded to the test platform at home shows the cached JPEG's aren't very big. Surprising, that. But, yeah. Your comment helps assure me I'm not going to get a nasty fright. In any case, it's one of those see how it goes things, I suppose.

It was a good call on the BSG panorama image. I wish I'd spotted that and been more up to speed on the photography and website thing. It's definately the sort of "value added" comment I like reading. My head's still spinning on this stuff for now so I haven't said anything about this topic. Just so you know.

Thanks, Brad.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

His name is Brad Templeton. You figure it out.
Please make up a name if you do not wish to give your real one.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Personal home pages only. Posts with biz home pages get deleted and search engines ignore all links
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options