Template talk:Location-Panorama

Comments

OK, firstly - this is excellent work Kolossos. I've had a go using the template on one of my images (RomanForum01ShiftN gobeirne.jpg), but I have to admit that a lot of the values for the parameters were the result of trial and error. Perhaps an explanatory image showing graphically what is meant by height1, height2, and maxheight would be really useful. Once again, thanks! - gobeirne 07:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I know that I need to make graphic. I hope, i find the time next week. The image from Forum romanum you have take was surely not easy, because only few objects are visible and some are hided by other buildings. The best results I get on 360° panoramic's. --Kolossos19:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

PErhaps you try your luck again on Image:Foro_romano_panoramica_Marcok_09feb08.jpg --Kolossos 17:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hmmmm.... still not quite got the hang of it - looking forward to that graphic :) - gobeirne 06:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
• Well, the image certainly helps. I can see that entering the correct height and alt values would produce a better result if your panorama is taken from well above the ground (looking down on your surroundings), but when the panorama is at ground level, the labels tend to bunch up at the horizon. Compare this version where I arrived at the values through trial and error (as discussed above) and has an alt of 100, and this version which uses correct alt (1.8 m) height values (I think!). A similar situation seems to occur for your Image:Dresden-Neumarkt-pano.jpg, which has an "alt" of 200. Am I on the right track? Any suggestions? - gobeirne 04:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I explain only one way with my sketch, if you work without alt like in this version you get a linear interpolation between height1(far) and height2(near). I hope this helps. --Kolossos 10:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

• Excellent - thanks! :) - gobeirne 20:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)