Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Demos "Deep Zoom" Technology

Barence writes "Yesterday, during a presentation for this year's Imagine Cup, Microsoft's Mark Taylor demonstrated the company's Deep Zoom technology to appreciative gasps of admiration from the computing students present. It's pretty impressive stuff, and you can try 'deep zooming' for yourself at the Hard Rock Memorabilia Site." Unfortunately the demo requires the Silverlight plugin and the story is pretty thin on technical details. I would be interested to see how they captured the image data to that level without massive pixelation.

272 comments

  1. Imagine Cup by suso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When I read Imagine Cup, I did a double take. Back in the 90s, Impulse, the company that made the popular 3D software Imagine, had a program called "Imagine CUP", which stood for Imagine Constant Upgrade Program. It allowed users to pay for the upgrade to Imagine up front and they could receive all the minor versions inbetween the major versions.

    So is this digital zoom stuff like the software that they "download off the internet in CSI: Miami" *Snicker*

    1. Re:Imagine Cup by dave420 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, this is the software they use on CSI (NY, at least). You can read a few articles about it starting here.

    2. Re:Imagine Cup by electromaggot · · Score: 3, Informative

      ...how they captured the image data to that level without massive pixelation. It's not that impressive. You zoom in extensively and it just gets fuzzy. So big deal: they just interpolate the color values between each pixel "point" instead of drawing huge square pixels.

      I was much more impressed with PicLens.
    3. Re:Imagine Cup by mark72005 · · Score: 2, Funny

      it's refreshing to get an inside look microsoft's plans for silverlight and the internet

    4. Re:Imagine Cup by ozmanjusri · · Score: 3, Interesting
      they just interpolate the color values between each pixel "point" instead of drawing huge square pixels.

      It's not a new interpolation algorithm.

      It's a live version of the The shift-and-add method or image-stacking technique used by astronomers for decades. It's just that now computer hardware is fast enough do it seamlessly.

      Basically, the zoom is made from hundreds of still photographs taken from different vantage points. There was something similar being done with tourist destinations, if I remember correctly.

      It's an interesting toy, but the practical applications are limited by the lengthy production process.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    5. Re:Imagine Cup by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      I doubt it's collated from hundreds of stills. I bet someone just took a shot of the statues, took a shot farther out and lined it up so it smoothly tweens, mapped that onto a postage stamp, mapped that onto a letter.. and then just animate it digitally. All you need is to run a 2D graphics engine and use stretching to make the illusion of Z-axis motion (I didn't try it -no silverlight- but I bet there's no parallax). All the transitions seamlessly handled by image processing. Not 2 gigabytes of high-res shots taken at sllliightly different distances.

    6. Re:Imagine Cup by Nemo's+Night+Sky · · Score: 1

      There was a math-genius guy who made an algorithm that can remove text from a flat image without any airbrushing or other editing of the image. He also had some great zooming stuff too. Also, was able to remove watermarks with incredible accuracy. That was a few years back too. Once again someone did something that someone already did, but they are rich, so you actually hear about it.

    7. Re:Imagine Cup by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      No, someone did something that someone already did, but you actually hear about it, so they are rich.

  2. Installing Silverlight by jbeaupre · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Makes me think of drug pushing: the first sample is free. Nancy Reagan, don't fail me now!

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    1. Re:Installing Silverlight by Ucklak · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Silverlight makes as much sense to install as Sibelus.
      Worthless POS of software.

      I even wasted an afternoon with Sibelus to install it and the websites that require it other than the first one I went to still say I need to install it.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    2. Re:Installing Silverlight by fluxmov · · Score: 1

      What is Sibelus?

    3. Re:Installing Silverlight by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

      OK, I'm a big enough person to admit it: I have no idea what Sibelus is. Regardless, I'm wondering about whether to install Silverlight. I'm on an Intel-Mac and in general have found that I've had little use for MS-specific plug-ins. Any other Mac folks found a legitimate reason to install Silverlight? Or is it all eye candy stuff right now?

      --
      Bark less. Wag more.
    4. Re:Installing Silverlight by an.echte.trilingue · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, a Finnish classical music composer.

      --
      weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
    5. Re:Installing Silverlight by Dragonshed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You may find reason to install it when it reaches RTM and companies start using it for production work. Right now it's beta1 (beta2 is going to be released sometime in the next couple weeks), and it's mostly for customers/developers wanting to experiment with it.

      What becomes of silverlight content, whether it's all eye candy or not, is anyones guess. What I can say is, developing for Silverlight 2 kicks ass.

    6. Re:Installing Silverlight by fluxmov · · Score: 1

      I know who Jean Sibelius was, but Ucklak was talking about some "Sibelus" software. "Sibelius" is a well-known music notation package. There might be a plugin you need to install to view score sheets created with it. Well, I was just pissed off a little bit by someone complaining about a piece of software they don't even know how to spell. I must admit that my post wasn't worth more than the original troll. Sorry.

    7. Re:Installing Silverlight by Ucklak · · Score: 1

      http://www.sibelius.com/cgi-bin/download/get.pl?com=sh&prod=scorch

      It's a plugin required by some sites to download sheet music or to view the first page before you buy it.
      It's a major pain in the ass, it worked the first time I used it then upgrades didn't work and so on and so forth. I'm at the point where I don't care.

      It's easier to find sheet music for free than it is to purchase it.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    8. Re:Installing Silverlight by Bozzio · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sibelius is a popular music notation software package.
      It has become pretty popular in the past 5ish years since its learning curve isn't nearly as steep as its main competitor Finale.

      People criticize Sibelius since, typically (at least for the versions I've used), its output isn't exactly professional quality.
      It is, however, a great tool for music students.

      Back in the day, Finale was the only option for amateur composers to produce professional looking manuscripts.
      I'm not sure how far Sibelius has come in the last few years, so things might have changed.

      --
      I just pooped your party.
    9. Re:Installing Silverlight by MBCook · · Score: 1

      It's either music notation software, or the Governor of Kansas.

      I'm guessing the first one.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    10. Re:Installing Silverlight by lilfields · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would like to see Silverlight content able to be indexed on search engines...that is one HUGE disadvantage that Flash has...it would really help push this product with web developers. Otherwise you have to create two versions of the site, one for search engines and one for users...though I think 100% flash sites are stupid...but people use them, and like I said it could help Microsoft boost it's market share quite substantially. Silverlight does look pretty impressive...

    11. Re:Installing Silverlight by billcopc · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sibelius Scorch, which is what Ucklak was probably referring to, is a browser plugin to display music notation. It's basically a DRM-encumbered midi/pdf hybrid. It's used almost on almost all sites selling sheet music, because it can restrict printing and saving.

      You can still take screenshots and stitch them back together, but that's obviously a pain in the ass.

      The plugin itself tends to be unreliable, it often bombs without delivering the goods, while still counting as a print/view and thus often locking you out of the product you paid for, which then requires much dicking about with the site staff to get it reset.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    12. Re:Installing Silverlight by Ucklak · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    13. Re:Installing Silverlight by Dragonshed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Similar hurdles exist for indexing silverlight content as they exist with flash. Silverlight is mainly for media and data/info visualization.

      It's technically possible to index silverlight 1 content, because it's content is "loose Xaml files", which means the site has xml files alongside html/js/etc, that is rendered by the silverlight 1 engine.

      Silverlight 2 has the same capabilities, but noone will use them, because using C# for application/interaction logic is way more productive than using Javascript. Silverlight 2 sites using C# have the following structure

      SomeSite.XAP (zip file containing all code and assets)
      - AppManifest.xml
      - ApplicationCode.dll (.NET Assembly containing Entrypoint and embedded assets)
      - SomeResources/ (compressed folder)
      - SomeResources/SomeImage.jpg (...)

      AdditionalContent.XAP (supplemental resources and code)
      - AppManifest.xml
      - SupplementalCode.dll

      This makes silverlight 2 apps and content updates really easy to, but are a barrier to extract information.

      In both cases the information gained isn't nearly as useful as textual html content, and completely different heuristics would be necessary to analyze the importance of one unit of textual content vs another. Indeed, nearly all the visual cues (The relative position, color, highlights, animations, and reactions to the user) would likely be lost in the process. Perhaps the search engine that can index flash and silverlight content is one that analyzes both visual and textual content.

    14. Re:Installing Silverlight by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why not use Rosegarden and Lilypond, fairly easy to use and great professional quality output. Awesome for students since it's you know free =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    15. Re:Installing Silverlight by Bozzio · · Score: 2, Informative

      The main reason is that most Music School "computer admins" won't want to fudge around with Linux.
      Yes, I know, Lilypond works in Windows.
      You try teaching 120 computer illiterate musicians how to use it :)

      Sibelius is popular because it's relatively easy, and it runs on Windows (so it's relatively easy to install/manage for its user base).

      --
      I just pooped your party.
    16. Re:Installing Silverlight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is Sibelus? The answer is out there, Fluxmov, and it's looking for you, and it will find you if you want it to ...
    17. Re:Installing Silverlight by benwaggoner · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's technically possible to index silverlight 1 content, because it's content is "loose Xaml files", which means the site has xml files alongside html/js/etc, that is rendered by the silverlight 1 engine.

      Silverlight 2 has the same capabilities, but noone will use them, because using C# for application/interaction logic is way more productive than using Javascript. Silverlight 2 sites using C# have the following structure Well, the XAML (markup GUI, and what's probably interesting to index) and code are still in different files. A developer can choose to put the XAML outside the .xap and the code in it. And if it's an unencrypted .xap (as most would be), it'd be easy enough for a search engine to look inside the .xap to find the XAML.

      Searchability of XAML is definitely something we're working on, and have guidelines for how to develop apps that are easily searched and index.
  3. yay by Nyall · · Score: 1

    didn't I see this in CSI ?

    --
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
    1. Re:yay by Nyall · · Score: 1

      Damn, I'm the 4th CSI joker

      --
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
  4. Haven't you ever.. by katterjohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    seen CSI? This technology is so passe.

    1. Re:Haven't you ever.. by dave420 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's the actual software they use on CSI. Read more here.

    2. Re:Haven't you ever.. by Eudial · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's the actual software they use on CSI. Read more here. I think he refers to the software in which they miraculously rotate a single two dimensional image to see stuff from other angles, or enhance gritty 320x200 CCTV images into uber-high resolution with no artifacts or fuzziness.

      (Might have been in some other forensics/cop show they did that, though.)
      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    3. Re:Haven't you ever.. by sceptre1067 · · Score: 1

      CSI? egads...

      They just ripped it off from Blade Runner. :-)

    4. Re:Haven't you ever.. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Oh I know - I always get a geeky laugh out of those shows. I just wanted to point out that they use this stuff on the show's set to get the desired effect of zooming into a picture, that's all. :)

    5. Re:Haven't you ever.. by billcopc · · Score: 4, Funny

      (Blade Runner)

      Load photo image.

      Enhance.

      (zooms in)

      Enhance.

      (pans around some obstacle)

      Enhance.

      (pans to the back door, opens the door?, reads license plate from some car a half-block away)

      Enhance.

      (finds intelligent life in Arkansas)

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:Haven't you ever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enhance

      http://ui10.gamespot.com/1995/d1p11_2.jpg
      (Paul McCartney and Renee Zellweger mating)

      Enhance

      http://ui10.gamespot.com/406/d1p12_2.jpg
      (looking into future life form created after)

      *curtsy of Gamespot and Late Night with Conan O'Brien's "What If They Mated"

    7. Re:Haven't you ever.. by enigma9 · · Score: 1

      (finds intelligent life in Arkansas)

      It all seemed so believable until this line.

      --
      My other post is +5, Interesting
    8. Re:Haven't you ever.. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Informative

      "...or enhance gritty 320x200 CCTV images into uber-high resolution with no artifacts or fuzziness."

      Depending on the footage, this is semi-possible. There's software out there that can watch the motion of an object and determine what the sub pixels were. It's not ideal in every scenario (even less likely slow in the case of a blurry face on a security cam...), and it won't be as snazzy as CSI, but it is possible in a general sense. It only works, though if it can get actual motion vectors from the footage.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    9. Re:Haven't you ever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so apparently it's news because the same thing they demo'd 2 years ago in flash can now run on siverlight?

      whoop dee fuckin doo.

    10. Re:Haven't you ever.. by ScreamingCactus · · Score: 1

      No, I haven't, because I don't watch CSI. But I did see it on Google Earth. And it was pretty impressive years ago when it came out.

      --
      The path to enlightenment is truly through homemade drugs!
    11. Re:Haven't you ever.. by zarkill · · Score: 1

      It also reminds me of the ZoomQuilt, which was done in Flash as a collaborative art project a couple years ago.

  5. DeepZoom by digitalgiblet · · Score: 3, Informative

    My understanding is that you use different resolutions of the photo. The original photo is obviously the highest res you can have, but you can make successively lower res copies. More or less just bring up a a higher res version when the user clicks.

    I saw this demoed at the Atlanta Code Camp back in March. Very cool to watch.

    1. Re:DeepZoom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Later this week:
      Microsoft patents mipmaps

    2. Re:DeepZoom by Bozzio · · Score: 2, Informative

      You sir, are right.

      Well, at least that's what it looks like when you use their silverlight app.
      You can actually spot the "seams" when zooming. Some of them aren't even superimposed correctly, leading me to believe that they are using a series a pictures taken with different cameras, instead of just storing lower resolution copies of the master image.

      --
      I just pooped your party.
    3. Re:DeepZoom by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      Close, but not really. The original highres image is stitched together from a bunch of normal magapixel photographs. Then they layered a nice UI on top to zoom to various levels of detail.

      Last year, Microsoft Research and their collaborators from University of Konstanz had a technical paper at Siggraph on this topic:

      http://johanneskopf.de/publications/gigapixel/index.html

  6. Old news by Hatta · · Score: 1

    They do this all the time on CSI.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Old news by notaprguy · · Score: 1

      CSI is using Microsoft's Deep Zoom technology...I think you're saying that but wasn't sure.

  7. oh lordy... by nuzak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would be interested to see how they captured the image data to that level without massive pixelation.

    You don't ... you don't actually think that the image data came from one photo ... do you?

    *slaps forehead*

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    1. Re:oh lordy... by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      Plus they were zooming out. I'm sure they only had the detail in that area. It was probably impossible to zoom into any other portion of the image.

    2. Re:oh lordy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't let me dull you with the definition to sarcasm, let me state that presentations like these make my caecum take valium.

      Basicly the Slashdot post made all of us agree in this regard.

      *slaps a big trout*

    3. Re:oh lordy... by Tarlus · · Score: 3, Informative

      You don't ... you don't actually think that the image data came from one photo ... do you? Nope.
      If you can find them, zoom in on those Beatles bobble heads that the article describes. They're very highly defined. Then zoom out a bit and scroll around to (for example) the surrounding Hard Rock Cafe frame. Wonderfully blurry with respect to the bobble heads.

      As you zoom out further, you'll notice how the "container" holding those bobble heads antialiases itself differently from the surrounding different-res artwork.

      If you move amongst the different images of guitars and clothes (etc) you'll notice in the lower right that it identifies who the centered item belongs to.

      So it appears to me that this is a number of different graphical objects that can be zoomed at relatively different distances at the same time. And it looks like they can be embedded within each other.
      --
      /* No Comment */
    4. Re:oh lordy... by ampathee · · Score: 1

      Wow, there's no need to be such a wanker.

  8. Unfortunately? by bigdanmoody · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unfortunately the demo requires the Silverlight plugin...

    A Microsoft tech demo requires the installation of new Microsoft software to view? Who would have though?

    While Silverlight might never be as widely-supported as Flash, I hope that perhaps the competition might force Adobe to do something about the CPU hog that is Flash.

    1. Re:Unfortunately? by SlashWombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your joking, right?

      It's Intel/AMD that are expected to fix this issue, by making huge leaps in processing grunt.

      I mean, you can not expect the current crop of programmers to actually write (or even just optimise) fast code.

      We now have many touted languages that are actually interpreters, not compilers. The argument from programmers is that today's CPU's are fast enough, and that these "new" languages are much easier to debug. They may as well be written in Visual Basic in my opinion!

    2. Re:Unfortunately? by dodgedodge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The beauty of Silverlight is the number of languages you can use. Even Ruby is coming to it.

      Silverlight is a browser plugin. It takes all of about 10 seconds to install.

      Flash needs to just go away.

    3. Re:Unfortunately? by seanonymous · · Score: 1

      Flash is made to deliver rich multimedia - like highly compressed video and audio and, in the next release, 3d graphics and real-time video filters. If your computer can handle this, it should be able to handle a few compiler inefficiencies. Also, some of the blame for the CPU abuse can be placed on the Flash developers who write sloppy code that no compiler can stand up to.

    4. Re:Unfortunately? by Tweenk · · Score: 0, Troll

      Silverlight is an Internet Explorer plugin. Fixed that for you.
      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    5. Re:Unfortunately? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Works fine with firefox w/vista. Silverlight 2 beta 1, as required by the demo site.

    6. Re:Unfortunately? by Barret7SC · · Score: 1

      Seemed to work just fine for me in Firefox 3rc2

      *shrug*

    7. Re:Unfortunately? by Tweenk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hm, apparently that should have been "Windows browser plugin".
      (the Linux stuff is called Moonlight, and isn't functional yet)

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    8. Re:Unfortunately? by prockcore · · Score: 3, Informative

      Amazing how it works on firefox in OSX then.

  9. Maybe not CSI by decowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But how is this different different from google maps (or live maps, or WHATEVER allows you to zoom out a lot)..

    1. Re:Maybe not CSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      A major difference is the inclusion high resolution collections, which are not fixed at runtime and can be rearranged programmatically. I know this because that is what we did on the Hard Rock Memorabilia project.

      Aside from that, it is another form of a "tile server" application... Just one that happens to be rather easy to use from a development perspective, and one that has been done really well (Zoomify/AJAX-based solutions don't hold a candle to the tile stitching and easing effects built into the MultiScaleImage control, IMHO).

    2. Re:Maybe not CSI by notaprguy · · Score: 1

      How about...I dunno...resolution? When I use Google maps it doesn't allow me to zoom down to the level where I can count the blades of grass in my lawn. The Hard Rock memorabilia site has resolution so high that you can see a fingerprint on Bo Diddley's guitar. On the Internet...that's pretty amazing.

    3. Re:Maybe not CSI by decowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about...that depends...on the source material? That Hard Rock site does have some pieces with amazing detail, but the stamp (that the article refers to) has clearly been added to the image, because even normal print doesn't have that detail.

    4. Re:Maybe not CSI by johnlcallaway · · Score: 1

      Google provides the same 'zoom down to the highest res image they have and then back out again' technique. Seams, tile loading, and all.

      Just like this over-hyped software does.

      The only 'newness' is not using a fixed high-level map. That probably took a few lines of SQL (or Transact-SQL depending on the source database.)

      Yawn .... nothing new to see here. Just a lame excuse to get me to install Silverlight.

      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    5. Re:Maybe not CSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regarding your comment about built-in functionality, I think you don't understand: Microsoft just released the Deep Zoom technology as part of Silverlight. It has not been available as part of any operating system or browser, to my knowledge.

      Microsoft is not looking to 'target a smaller group of people', they are looking to throw their hat in the ring of RIA technologies. The resultant target audience is fully dependent on the acceptance of consumers (or reluctance, in the case of people that choose to continue bashing on Microsoft). Development companies such as mine do not "put the onus" on any consumer to install another plug-in; that is up to the component developers (in this case, Microsoft, and in previous cases, Adobe).

      All that aside, if you have such a powerful distaste for installing software for new features, why do you even care to comment on things like this?

    6. Re:Maybe not CSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, then how is it different from Google Earth which can do very nice, smooth zooms from the planet down to a single house?

  10. The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Macs by attemptedgoalie · · Score: 0

    That sucks.

    It requires the Silverlight 2.0 plugin which says it won't work on a pre-Intel Mac.

    The pre-Intel Macs only get Silverlight 1.0 per Microsoft's site.

    Nice. Now I have to upgrade a whole computer to view a freakin' website?

    --
    My mom says I'm cool.
  11. As seen on Super Troopers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enhance...Enhance...Enhance...

    1. Re:As seen on Super Troopers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Super Troopers? I hope Decker shoves a unicorn horn up your ass.

    2. Re:As seen on Super Troopers! by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Thank you.
      People need to see Blade Runner.
      (Especially people who love Ghost in the Shell...)

  12. Multiple resolutions by clarkn0va · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My understanding is that you use different resolutions of the photo. Just speculating here (I don't anticipate installing Silverlight for another 24 years or so), but I think you're on the money. It should work something like Google Earth, where the resolution is improved progressively as you zoom in.

    db

    --
    I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
    1. Re:Multiple resolutions by wsuschmitt · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I thought about this when I saw this: Google Maps or Google Earth. It is probably also something similar to technology used in video games that keeps progressively updating the details of an object that is far away that steadily comes closer and closer and adds detail.

    2. Re:Multiple resolutions by KDEWolf · · Score: 1

      Yes I'd mod you up if I could. This can be done using Flash, or even Javascript. Simply many different alternating images with different "zoom levels" (that actually may not be zoom levels, just different images, but give this illusion to the viewer) There's NO new technology on what's done. This while topic is just stupid...

  13. Too good to be true by Boydacus · · Score: 1

    The article, the pictures... it all seems to be too good to be true. Here's one of many of my problems with this: The stamp. Is this supposed to be real? It certainly looks fake. Zooming is nothing new, and I'm sure that if I took a hi-rez pic, and squeezed it into a part of another hi-rez pic, it would be cool to zoom out of too. Now, the fact they squeezed that much data into an file for viewing on the interwebs is impressive, but I still hate Silverlight. Perhaps they can do that with some useful stuff, like footage from the JFK assassination... perhaps we can look at a reflection in glass and see that it's no Lee Harvey Oswald but actually "Cancer Man"!

  14. SeaDragon by Dragonshed · · Score: 5, Informative

    Silverlight's MultiScaleImage control (aka deep zoom) is a version of the SeaDragon renderer. The image format it uses is a custom tree structure that contains pixel details relevant to both it's position in the tree and relative to it's peers. Essentially, it's a hierarchical image with very smooth transitions.

    Silverlight: silverlight.net
    SeaDragon: http://labs.live.com/seadragon.aspx

    1. Re:SeaDragon by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Does it matter whether you're black or white?

    2. Re:SeaDragon by CODiNE · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Thanks for the link, with it I'm starting to see MS' new strategy to compete with Apple stealing their "cool".

      The Seadragon team is currently tuning its DirectX implementation, making the most of the new Windows Media Photo format, and cranking on the Photosynth Technology Preview.


      So they're essentially recreating Apple's Quartz + OpenGL + standard image formats with Photosynth + DirectX + WMPF.
      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    3. Re:SeaDragon by Dragonshed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So they're essentially recreating Apple's Quartz + OpenGL + standard image formats with Photosynth + DirectX + WMPF. Simply put, apple does an incredible job visually representing itself, it's technology and providing a user experience that is very hard to match.

      That said, I disagree that microsoft is recreating any preexisting technology. You could argue that DirectX is just like OpenGL, but that's likely grossly oversimplified.

      Photosynth and Seadragon are demoed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHsYnkLnepk

      Neither of those are similar to things that apple has done.
    4. Re:SeaDragon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LivePicture had a viewer for this back in 1998. Also had a photoshop-esque program for editing massive files, applied the changes later in batch to the larger file, did it real-time on a screen resolution photo. It was nice (though flakey).

    5. Re:SeaDragon by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 1

      Dragonshed, please see the URL in my sig.

      I'm on a one-man crusade to fix this :)

    6. Re:SeaDragon by electroniceric · · Score: 1

      Well said. Point is, if there's innovation in there, it's in the elegance of the map structure/coordinate scheme for the pixel data, rather than whatever's done in code. The approach they've chosen (introduce a new coordinate scheme rather than layer existing bitmaps) seems fairly elegant, although in practice a lot probably depends on how easily you transform from whatever acquisition method you have for the pixels to their coordinate system.

      I don't know this domain, but I have to suspect that type of coordinate transformation is familiar to lots of folks who have thought about image rendering (hence the ability, as noted below for the BBC to release their own such widget), and thus isn't really a new vein of thinking, just slicker packaging.

      So in fact, this looks a lot like what Microsoft has always done, to package some algorithm or programming concept as a widget that developers can use for simplified development - the other part of the strategy being to tie it tightly to some development platform. If this widget were implemented in JavaScript rather than Flash^H^H^H^H^HSilverlight, wouldn't it be just another piece of code put out by some mathematically inclined graduate student that's clever but not ready for easy incorporation into production websites?

      Credit where credit is due, and none where it ain't due.

    7. Re:SeaDragon by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      "The Seadragon team is currently tuning its DirectX implementation, making the most of the new Windows Media Photo format, and cranking on the Photosynth Technology Preview.

      So they're essentially recreating Apple's Quartz + OpenGL + standard image formats with Photosynth + DirectX + WMPF."

      Of course, as usual Apple sticks to industry standards as long as possible while MS tries all to lock it to Windows only technologies. Also they do it on a platform/market which they are considered a wannabe-joke compared to established Flash technology.

      and people wonder why people tends to laugh at them. I have used Zoomify (.com) on one of sites I maintain. It accepts industry standards like JPEG/TIFF and uses industry standard jpeg for the thing ms "invented".

    8. Re:SeaDragon by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      I am on OSX/PPC and I can't see their demo, Moonlight clone can't display it either on Linux/BSD, it is tied so deep to windows only technologies which in fact, industry standard alternatives are available.

      See where the ignorance and hate coming to MS?

    9. Re:SeaDragon by �berhund · · Score: 1

      The title of the first linked article is "Deep Zoom: proof that Microsoft is still capable of amazing technology".

      But the SeaDragon site says "Seadragon is an incubation project resulting from the acquisition of Seadragon Software in February." So the first title should really be "Proof that Microsoft is still capable of buying out or copying amazing technology".

      --
      -Uberhund
  15. layered bitmaps by Brit_in_the_USA · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Beatles models and signatures pear to be the highest level of detail unless there are other "Easter eggs". That level of zoom on any surrounding areas is pixelated. They have stacked multiple high res photos at various scales in this particular area.

    1. Re:layered bitmaps by CHEEK-shoo-loob · · Score: 1

      The Beatle's Magical Mystery Tour bus image appears to have been doctored. If you look closely at the bus windows (pay particular attentione to the pixelation along the window frame lines) you can see some magical limo tint has been applied. It makes me curious to know what was covered up. Perhaps the same Photoshop designer made the Britney Spears picture appear blurry.

      --
      Foreach(Human human in Universe.Humans){human.Enlight();}
    2. Re:layered bitmaps by notaprguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Check out the fingerprint on Bo Diddley's guitar. That's pretty cool too.

  16. Impressive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this impressive?

  17. they stole it from blade runner and csi by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Redundant

    that ability to zoom into a picture with far better clarity than the picture offers. deep zooming would seem to be a wrapper for high res pictures

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:they stole it from blade runner and csi by Drathos · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm far more interested in the tech that allowed them to change the camera angle of the photographs in Bladerunner. When's that coming?

      --
      End of line..
    2. Re:they stole it from blade runner and csi by ady1 · · Score: 1

      Purely theoretically speaking, it is possible to make a camera which captures a 3d surface.

      An image sensor in a camera is made up of Light dependent transiters which biasness changes depending on light exposure (magnified by a lens of course). Now add a laser distance measurer along with each pixel (crazy idea, I know) which would enable you not only to capture the color of each pixel but also its distance. This will record a 3d image which would be, using two of more sensors, walked around like in bladerunner.

  18. Yet another Deep Zoom by MythMoth · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ian Griffiths implemented a deep zoom for the BBC in their Big Weekend festival. Rather pleasingly they chose to call it the "Big Zoomy Thing" in a nice bit of anti-jargon.

    --
    --- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
    1. Re:Yet another Deep Zoom by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Ian Griffiths implemented a deep zoom for the BBC in their Big Weekend festival. Rather pleasingly they chose to call it the "Big Zoomy
      > Thing" in a nice bit of anti-jargon.

      That used Silverlight too, though.

    2. Re:Yet another Deep Zoom by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2, Informative

      That one is also using Silverlight. Except they botched the version check, and so it won't work if you have a later version than the one they coded for. Oops.

    3. Re:Yet another Deep Zoom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like that other one, TWAIN? Otherwise known as "Technology Without An Interesting Name"?

  19. This is not new... by ImNotYourFriend · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Typical Microsoft.. they bought out a company that created the technology. It's called Microsoft Photosynth and this video explains how they do it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEcHcRqxmj4

    1. Re:This is not new... by iang · · Score: 5, Informative

      Typical Slashdot... they post a snarky anti-Microsoft comment with a pretentious air of superiority but get the details wrong.

      Photosynth is not Deep Zoomm. Photosynth reconstructs 3D models from collections of 2D photos of the scene acquired from different positions and angles. And as far as I know, Photosynth wasn't an acquisition - it was produced by Microsoft Research.

      Deep Zoom was an acquisition, but it was the technology formerly known as Seadragon. It's completely unrelated - Deep Zoom/Seadragon is a 2D thing.

      And it's an acquisition, but so what? Ooh, naughty Microsoft - how dare they take exciting technology developed by a startup and put it in the hands of millions of users? Shocking! Clearly it they should have left it to sink in obscurity.

      --
      Ian Griffiths
    2. Re:This is not new... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Typical Microsoft.. they bought out a company that created the technology.
      I'm sorry, but "so what"? Even "good" companies do this. Open Source Heart-throb Google has even done it.
      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:This is not new... by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they were demoed at the same time. There's a video on YouTube.

      Either way, this is old news with new branding. How they expect to capitalize on this is my question, perhaps I should RTFA. This seems like a prime candidate for open source, though: not a killer app in itself, but the technology could probably become part of a number of interesting applications.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    4. Re:This is not new... by dedazo · · Score: 1
      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    5. Re:This is not new... by ImNotYourFriend · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Photosynth incorporates Seadragon's amazingly smooth digital rendering and zoom capabilities." -http://labs.live.com/photosynth/whatis/seadragon.html With out Sea Dragon, there would be no Photosynth. Oh, and you are a douche.

    6. Re:This is not new... by reg · · Score: 4, Informative

      Photosynth was acquired from the University of Washington... The original was in Java and called photo tourism. http://phototour.cs.washington.edu/

    7. Re:This is not new... by db32 · · Score: 1

      Well, given their history. IE was an aquisition too. They took the exciting technology developed by a small company and put it in the hands of millions of users. Now look what we have on the internet because of that. I am willing to take the gamble of missing out on cool things if we can avoid any more of Microsoft putting crap like that into the hands of millions. Now if you will excuse me I have some office macro viruses to write, some vbs scripts to email about, and some activex exploits to post.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    8. Re:This is not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical windows shill, slamming reasonable people while posting a pro-Microsoft comment that actually turns out to be false, as expected. Thanks, reg, for clearing it up though. Mods, if you're awake, please do your thing!

    9. Re:This is not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical Slashdot... ... Shocking! Clearly it they should have left it to sink in obscurity. No, that comes after they've eliminated anything else in the same category. Try to keep up.
    10. Re:This is not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Not exactly. It was a collaboration between the UW and Microsoft Research, funded partly by Microsoft. Microsoft is now totally funding this research.

      I agree with the gp. The arrogance of Slashdot posters every time MS is mentioned has become incredibly redundant.

    11. Re:This is not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing on that page that says they acquired the technology. If you actually read the page it states the project was supported by Microsoft Research. Second of all it states Photosynth is based on the research. Not acquired.

    12. Re:This is not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why is there a large Microsoft logo at the top of http://phototour.cs.washington.edu/applet/index.html ?

  20. Sounds like GigaPan by higgins · · Score: 2, Informative

    The folks at CMU have a similar thing:

    http://gigapan.org/

    It uses a (cheap) commodity digital camera, combined with a smart tripod, good photo stitching software, and a nice Flash UI to give you highly zoomable panoramas. The CMU thing has been around for a while --- over a year at least, plus I'm pretty sure you can get one of the tripod mounts if you participate in the beta and create your own.

    1. Re:Sounds like GigaPan by poetmatt · · Score: 0

      There is really good stitching software out there, specifically one similar to your username (hugin's panorama stitcher) which is multi-core friendly (literally an option says: "how many cores do you have" to multithread it).

      You don't even need a tripod because technically it can stich vertically and not just horizontally in that case. It also stiches fast (5 shots that were 7.2 megapixel were able to be stitched together in about 30 seconds, ending with a 6600x1300 resolution)

      Note their example image on that. I imagine with a more powerful PC (maybe a fast phenom) you could probably do it realtime instead....it went damn fast for me with an E6700.

    2. Re:Sounds like GigaPan by croddy · · Score: 1

      (literally an option says: "how many cores do you have" to multithread it).

      ...don't ask from me what you can find in /proc.

    3. Re:Sounds like GigaPan by poetmatt · · Score: 0

      Hey, its not like that...although I was so off today I read /proc like 30 times and thought it was a folder off /usr/bin or something lol.

      If you have a system that either a: identifies improperly, b: uses virtual cores, or c: you only want to use X number of your cores, it makes sense to have the option to specify, plus not everyone wants to be at 100% processor usage, etc.

  21. Deep Ream by Foofoobar · · Score: 2, Funny

    There next product for stealing your checkbook while Windows does a colonoscopy

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  22. My eyes... by owlnation · · Score: 0

    ... I misread this as "Imagine Crap" at first. I suspect I was right first time too.

  23. typical old-school microsoft by drDugan · · Score: 0, Troll

    "The Silverlight plugin does not work on pre-Intel Macs. Sorry."

    embrace, extend, extinguish.

    1. Re:typical old-school microsoft by maxume · · Score: 1

      Well, except for the embrace step. And the extending.

      Come to think of it, I think Apple extinguished pre-Intel Macs all on their own.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:typical old-school microsoft by ChatHuant · · Score: 1

      "The Silverlight plugin does not work on pre-Intel Macs. Sorry."

      embrace, extend, extinguish.


      You're absolutely right - especially when you contrast with the way Apple supports their own pre-Intel computers.

    3. Re:typical old-school microsoft by grm_wnr · · Score: 1

      Apple themselves don't support PPC Macs fully anymore. Try to run the iPhone SDK on a G5 some time.

  24. Deep Zoom? More like Quick Load. by Itninja · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I admit the demo is neat and all, but they are not really zooming into the same image. They have just developed a way to quickly load the high resolution image on the fly. Kind of like how Google Maps will deliver a higher res map when you zoom in; but this is happening much faster.

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    1. Re:Deep Zoom? More like Quick Load. by xtracto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Kind of like how Google Maps will deliver a higher res map when you zoom in; but this is happening much faster.

      Kind of like what happens when you use Google earth very close (i.e., in-situ) to where the servers with the data are stored.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:Deep Zoom? More like Quick Load. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is correct. but think of how profound an impact Google Maps has made with spatial information. That same technology can now be applied to different kinds of images.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. PowersOfTen by chile_addict · · Score: 1

    The idea pre-dates CSI. Does anyone remember the movie "Powers of Ten" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_Ten) I remember watching this in science class in middle school and being pretty impressed.

  27. I see Elvis by Xmastrspy · · Score: 0

    Pubes?

  28. WTF? by cptdondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're like me and a bunch of very smart students, you can't fail to be impressed. I must be dumb.... Stiching together an image of higher-res photos might be a technical wow, but sorry, I'm not really impressed. This sort of thing I might expect from a college lab, but for a multi-billion dollar company to present this as some sort of earth-shaking innovation?

    1. Re:WTF? by Dragonshed · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The earth-shaking innovation is in the form including deep zoom as part of a plugin featuring a fast 2d compositor with video decoding and animation support, common RIA application components and controls using a small .NET Runtime, packaged in a 4.3mb download, "installed in 20 seconds or less", and all of it designed to run on multiple platforms.

      MS Devs have done some amazing things within their allotted size quotas. /perspective-and-koolaid

    2. Re:WTF? by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

      Point taken- just FYI, Adobe Flash is 1.4MB and installs in less than 5 seconds from clicking accept on the license.

    3. Re:WTF? by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      Point taken- just FYI, Adobe Flash is 1.4MB and installs in less than 5 seconds from clicking accept on the license.
      And it's no small secret that flash really, really, really sucks. It's just used so damn much because adobe managed to sneak it onto enough machines this side of the moon to count as a given as being on any arbitrary computer.

      I'm sure a website full of Linux fanboys can understand my sentiment.
      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
    4. Re:WTF? by should_be_linear · · Score: 1

      designed to run on multiple platforms.

      Finally, pass a link dude, I already gave up looking for Java version.

      --
      839*929
    5. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I refuse to install Flash, SilverLight/MoonLight is a similar concept from a company I neither trust, support or respect.

      And it's no small secret that Windows really, really, really sucks. It's just used so damn much because Microsoft managed to sneak it onto enough machines this side of the moon to count as a given as being on any arbitrary computer.

      I'm sure a website full of Microsoft shills will ignore these sentiments.

    6. Re:WTF? by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      Note that Windows is being forced to become a better product due to competition in the Server space from Linux, and the Desktop space from OSX. I can only hope the same will happen with flash/silverlight.

      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
  29. Uses gigapixel imagery as source by prakslash · · Score: 4, Informative
    There is a bit of a misdirection in articles and other material about Deep Zoom.

    Most people go ooh and aah because they (wrongly) assume that it zooms into normal resolution photos .

    It doesnt (because as you and I know, it physically can't).

    Deep Zoom does NOT perform CSI/CIA-style photo enhancement. If you dig deeper, you will find that what Deep Zoom is intended for is to enable one to focus on a smaller portion of a giga-pixel photograph so you do not have to download the whole photograph.

    Think of it like a hierarchical smooth slicing of a large high resolution photograph and only downloading those "planes" and "sections within a plane" that the user is interested in seeing.

    Interesting technology but not magic.

    1. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by dave420 · · Score: 3, Informative

      They actually use SeaDragon (the name of the technology) on CSI, for those sections you're talking about. Obviously they lie about what it's doing, but that's the software you see.

    2. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, except you're wrong.

      You're right, it's not zooming and 'enhancing' normal images.

      You're wrong, it's not zooming into gigapixel images. It zooms into images stiched together from any resolutions, shapes, or sizes. It's an extention of their photosynth tech which allows thousands of independant pictures to be stitched together into a 3-d model (This is limited to 2-d, making it a lot simpler). Think Google Maps, except with a lot more fluid stitching. This allows you to 'cheat' and only include high res photos of areas of interest.

    3. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by markana · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And exactly how is this different from the wavelet-compressed MrSid format? LizardTech was doing this sort of "download-what-your're-focused-on" multi-resolution zoom *years* ago. Six years ago I could zoom in smoothly and deeply to an area of a multi-GB image, and the plugin would grab only those pixels needed to show that area at that resolution.

      So what exactly is new here, except for the use of Silverblight?

    4. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by benwaggoner · · Score: 1

      They actually use SeaDragon (the name of the technology) on CSI, for those sections you're talking about. Obviously they lie about what it's doing, but that's the software you see. And thus CSI induces rage and envy into photo retouchers and digital media experts around the world :).

      I've been asked by relatives to take a blurry picture and zoom into non existent detail, and when I say it's impossible and a violation of information theory, they tell me that they can do it on CSI, so it can't be that hard...
    5. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ah, in that case we could do this on the server as a PHP script, for example. We might specify the image we want and the dimensions of the slice of the image we want as part of the URL.


      The script could maintain a slice cache as well.


      This would be like the first cousin of a thumbnailer.

    6. Re:Uses gigapixel imagery as source by jon_galloway · · Score: 1

      Here's my comparison of Deep Zoom to existing quadtree based zooming technologies like Google Maps, Zoomify, etc. http://weblogs.asp.net/jgalloway/archive/2008/03/21/why-silverlight-2-deep-zoom-really-is-something-new.aspx

      Summary - the technology isn't new, but they've made it trivially easy for a developer to do things that would otherwise take a lot of work, e.g. build complex collections of images across a wide variety of resolutions, add custom events and controls within a multiscale image, etc.

  30. No free lunch by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is two ways to get this level of zoom to work:

    1) have the pixels in the first place
    2) having more pixels in the first place.

    Anything else is a fundamental violation of the laws of physics and math. You simply can not fake what you don't have without it being exactly that: a fake. There is no storage printing technology which could accomplish this level of zooming, and they carefully do not say that this is actually a continuous zoom of a picture on a stamp.

    Deep Zoom works by letting you meld several images in such a way as pretend its one image.

    Basically, its a con-job of transitioning several different images, where one is a re-photograph of sub portion of the original.

    The implication of the article is that this is all one image containing a nearly infinite level of detail, which it most emphatically is NOT.

    The author is probably equally impressed by street corner magic tricks.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:No free lunch by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Deep Zoom works by letting you meld several images in such a way as pretend its one image.

      That's still very useful.

      Basically, its a con job of transitioning several different images, where one is a re-photograph of sub portion of the original.

      'con job' has needless connotations of an intent to deceive.

      The implication of the article is that this is all one image containing a nearly infinite level of detail, which it most emphatically is NOT.

      No. The implication of the article is that you can provide this as a user interface, which is very cool. Google Earth isn't interesting because its a 'con job' to let us think we can zoom in and out of a single monster image of the planet. Its interesting because its a natural and convenient UI to use.

      And we don't have to download every single pixel of every single higher res image of a tree in Nigeria to have a closeup look at a parking lot in London. Detail is loaded on the fly, as needed, while the user gets a 'seamless' and comparatively low bandwidth experience.

      Its not particularly new as an idea. Or even as an implementation. But maybe Microsoft's tools make setting it up substantially easier, and that alone would be a nice bit of progress.

      The author is probably equally impressed by street corner magic tricks.

      I am impressed by street corner magicians too. Not because I think they're magical, but because I am impressed at their showmanship, sleight of hand, dexterity, and general ability to appear magical.

    2. Re:No free lunch by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Sure you ... if you know something about what you're ....... at.

      They analyse the data properties of the camera and see what data is rejected and where data is averaged, this is very intensive and esoteric research and not something that's obvious.

    3. Re:No free lunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How Dare You!
      --The Streetcorner Magician

    4. Re:No free lunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I would argue that this is indeed a street corner magic trick. They did not have the pixels in the first place.

      According to some very rough calculations, if the signature really existed as represented on that stamp, it would be about 1/300th of an inch across. I'd be very surprised to see printed output with that amount of detail.

      Ever look at a stamp (or even a glossy magazine, or a photograph) under a 10x loupe? Nuthin' but dots and grain.

    5. Re:No free lunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I assume they do this with a multiresolution encoding (fast wavelet transform, etc.) where low resolution is encoded for large FOV with low detail and so on.

    6. Re:No free lunch by Filter · · Score: 1

      Almost all non trivial data structures implore some level of cleverness to get the most out of the technology we have at the time. I don't see it as a trick, just one way to do it.

      --

      "better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07

    7. Re:No free lunch by dj42 · · Score: 1

      That was a good response. I feel like you just did what I want to do every time I see the O'Reilly Factor.

      --
      We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
    8. Re:No free lunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think everyone here really really missunderstands Deep zoom.

      The trick is not to create one big image that is composed of different resoluions. Anyone can do that, thats cool but not special.

      The awesomeness of the technoloy, is that it will only retrive the image at the resolution and corrinates that you need, so only getting the reativing data you need, and it will do it fast.

      When you ask for some information, It does not need to access the whole of the images data to get what you need.

      no grabbing all the image data and then scaling, thats the suckers(slow) way of doing it

    9. Re:No free lunch by sgtrock · · Score: 1

      Even after reading several responses, I still don't see how this technique is any different than what Google and others have done already. Many posters seem to be saying, "It's really different! (Except how it's exactly the same.)" Care to enlighten me?

    10. Re:No free lunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything else is a fundamental violation of the laws of physics and math.


      Actually, it is well possible in principle to enhance the resolution of images beyound their physical content (google "superresolution"). The trick is Bayesian statistics: If you know something about the pictured object, besides what the pixels tell you, it's possible to enhance the resolution further by using this information.

      Of course, this doesn't work for _any_ image, but it's standard, for example, in Astronomy (if you know the point-spread function of a telescope, you can "de-convolve" it out of it). No magic, but no "violation of the laws of physics" either.
  31. Crash...bang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just installed the silverlight plugin for FF. Everytime I try to close the page to the Hard Rock site, FF crashes.

    Great product!

    Seriously, how is this making people "gasps"? Take a higher res photo and guess what... you can zoom in more!

    Magic!

    Oh, and being able to zoom in on a monster sized image, a small portion at a time, is not "gasp" material.

    Have a display window, shift it around to display the portion of the pic you want to see. "Gasp"!

  32. I don't get it by Mike1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't we already have the ability to process multi-resolution images in, for example, Google Maps? You know, zooming in and out images with large total resolution?

    It would be impressive if the photo they demonstrated on was anything but a photoshop, but given that the 428x134 signature is 52x11 in the 350x237 statuette picture which is 29x26 in the 428x350 hard rock picture which is 87x87 in the 428x399 stamp picture, for the stamp to be real would require a 33 gigapixel stamp (which, at 1 inch square, would be printed at 33,000,000,000 DPI).

    To me zooming in and displaying a different image isn't really as exciting at the article author makes it sound? Maybe I'm missing something because the journalist sounds pretty damn excited about it.

    --
    "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    1. Re:I don't get it by jcr · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm missing something because the journalist sounds pretty damn excited about it.

      What you're missing is that the "journalist" apparently has never used Google earth, or seen a demo by any CAD vendor in the last 20 years.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:I don't get it by prockcore · · Score: 2, Interesting

      what you're missing is that seadragon constructs these things analytically from a collection of photos.

      Basically I can run around taking random photos some zoomed in, some not and seadragon will automatically stitch it all together.

    3. Re:I don't get it by DougBTX · · Score: 1

      Which camera took the photo of the 33,000,000,000 DPI stamp?

    4. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like machine vision has been doing for a decade or more? The SIFT guy has been doing this stuff forever. I bet google maps isn't constructed by hand either. And autopano is an open source project that does the stitching.

  33. The image is only 21K by statemachine · · Score: 4, Funny

    But the viewer is 126G.

  34. a little late, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wasn't this demonstrated at a TED conference, umm...2 years ago?? I'm almost certain it was. There was an image of the entire text of some story that was several dozen pages, each page holding an entire chapter of several thousand words, and you could zoom to any level. years ago. way to go, microsoft.

    1. Re:a little late, isn't it? by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      wasn't this demonstrated at a TED conference, umm...2 years ago??
      Yes, in fact it was. By Microsoft.
      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
  35. Chris Alexander by Thirsty+Ferret · · Score: 1

    I was at the event as an Imagine Cup finalist, and the technology on display was very impressive. The Deep Zoom application was demoed as from the Hard Rock Cafe Memorabilia site, and looked very fun to play with indeed. The zoomed-in bits were very impressive. My live blog of the day: http://www.chris-alexander.co.uk/?post=19

    --
    Ferret
  36. "New" technology... by TheDawgLives · · Score: 0, Troll

    So, wait... Is this some new technology, or just the ajax from google earth ported to silverlite? This is just another in a long line of ripoffs that M$ has pulled.

    --
    -TheDawgLives suckitdown
  37. Britney Spears photo near the pink dress by Legendre · · Score: 1

    There is pink dress near the bottom right corner. The legend says it was worn by Britney Spears. On top of the dress is a photo of Britney Spears wearing the dress.

    I zoomed all the way in hoping that I could see Britney wearing that dress. Of course, it's too low rez and you can't even tell it's Britney.

    DeepZoom is not that deep after all. I would have let out an "ahhh" if I could have seen Britney.

  38. oops by dodgedodge · · Score: 1

    Are people forgetting that "Microsoft doesn't innovate"?

    OOOOOOOh, it's requires Silverlight. I'm not going to waste 10 seconds installing that!

  39. And this is "revolutionary"? by w4rl5ck · · Score: 1

    Oh come now, that's not "revolutionary". Why not?

    Because this is basically a very simple technology of stacked images. In fact, it is not much more than a proper implementation of a scaling algorithm plus intelligent preloading/guessing of "the data we will need next".

    No black magic in there, no "how the frell did they do THAT". For me.

    I felt pretty frelled when I got a first glimpse of google maps. That was "revolutionary" stuff. Or Quake I, for that matter. Years earlier, Wolfenstein 3D. Or the Wii-mote.

    Fast deep image navigation? w00t.

    Surface, that's a neat idea. Wait until they cripple it with DRM and stuff, but it's a neat idea in the first place.

    1. Re:And this is "revolutionary"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this different than the MrSid viewer that Lizardtech put out? Is this a new format, or just JPG2000 or mrsid. Sooooo... they just made it part of Silverlight then, thats the big news?

      "Back to work you scum! Nothing to see here."

  40. Blaise Aguera y Arcas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm assuming this is the same technology presented at TED.

    He does a more exciting demo than that Hardrock one.

    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129

  41. Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by oborseth · · Score: 4, Informative

    It crashed Firefox 3.0 on my Mac Book after installing the plug in and viewing the demo.

    1. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly the same here. Silverlight crashed it all.
      I should have known better: Microsoft technology in Mozilla on a Apple... ow well, they got some bug reports at least.

    2. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by plover · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It consistently crashes Firefox 3.0 RC2 on Vista 64, too, after installing the Silverlight plug-in. I disabled the plug-in and no crashes.

      Of course the Silverlight and the zooming works as advertised in IE 7.0.6

      --
      John
    3. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh. It says on the download site for Silverlight which browsers are supported. Note that Firefox 3 isn't on the list for Mac or PC.

    4. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're lucky. I can't get the demo to work at all on Firefox running on my Fedora 7 desktop...

      "Microsoft Silverlight may not be supported on your computer's hardware or operating system." Hmmm.... really?

    5. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 1

      Silverlight is known to be broken with Firefox 3. This will change sooner or later.

      --

      My Karma: ran over your Dogma
      StrawberryFrog

    6. Re:Crashed FF 3.0 on my Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you send the FireFox 3 beta bug report to Mozilla and be done with it?

  42. Is it just me, or...... by zappepcs · · Score: 1

    are there others reading /. that are thinking.. Yawn, wake me when it's working like Google maps only much better?

    I realize that it's new, and takes effort, but I can't break out the oohs and aaahhhs just yet. No matter how good it is, is it worth upgrading for?

    Car analogy: Isn't this like demonstrating a concept car that they intend to put into production, but production will be a little bit different?

    I'll wait for SP2 (or equivalent), thanks very much.

    1. Re:Is it just me, or...... by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      It took less time for me to install it and play with it to find out for myself than it did for you to write out that comment. Why not just try it instead of immediately complaining?

  43. Deep Ripoff by jdb2 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This is a lame "embraced" and "extended" version of an old demo effect that was first demonstrated in the early 90's, if not earlier. Obviously the entire "zoomed-out" image is not stored. The "zoomed-in" images are stored, but to make the effect work a series of intermediate images has to be stored between each "zoom stage". For example, in one implementation, when "zooming" through the intermediate stage between a "larger" and "smaller" image, for each series of frames an "outside" or "boundary" image is stored in full resolution and that image is zoomed ( and clipped against the view port boundaries ) until it is outside the view port while at the same time the "internal" image is enlarged until it fills the viewport and then the process is repeated again with the "internal image" now consisting of the next "boundary" image surrounding another "internal image".

    Go to Pouet and you'll find many demonstrations of this effect.

    jdb2

    1. Re:Deep Ripoff by jdb2 · · Score: 0, Troll

      How the hell is this a Troll?

  44. Old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus you guys call yourselves techies!!!

    Its been live for awhile on hardrock and obviously its not pixelating cause its one MASSIVE stiched together image set in super high resolution.

    The real question is how they progressively update the images.

  45. This has been done. Better. by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    See Charles and Ray Eames' Powers of Ten. Now that's a zoom.

    As for doing it in real time, Keyhole (bought by Google and renamed Google Earth) was doing this on PCs five years ago. Any decent GPU can do this today, and you can download Google Earth to see it.

    I saw one of the first systems able to do this in real time about 25 years ago. It was inside a classified tank at a major aerospace firm, and required a rack of special-purpose hardware. The user interface was beautifully simple - a big trackball (for pan), a lever (for zoom), and a knob (for rotation).

    Even Microsoft's little film isn't original. That technique has been used a few times in commercials.

    So Silverlight doing this isn't exactly a big "wow" development.

    1. Re:This has been done. Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems most people here are missing the point completely. Anyone who uses Google Maps/Earth as examples are missing the point completely.

      Instead of arguing whether there is merit in the MS solution, and before you post yet another "this is garbage" retort, go create a "deep zoom" experience of your own using your own photographs - but without the Silverlight Deep Zoom technology.

      Yes, it can be done (i'll let the readers figure it out), but putting Deep Zoom in Silverlight has the potential to bring the experience to scale. To get you started, here's a nice SilverLight app to help: http://photozoom.mslivelabs.com/

      But you can use Flash, Google Maps/Earth or C++ - pick yout poison. Just post your Deep Zoom example back here so everyone else can see it and compare to the Hard Rock example.

    2. Re:This has been done. Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better:
      Powers of One

  46. jose moreira by matrixownsyou · · Score: 1

    KEWL! now they can spot bugs from a mile away!!!

  47. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    There is Moonlight for Linux and as there are ports of Linux for PowerPC CPUs and Moonlight is open source, you would only have to upgrade your OS.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  48. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by Zebra_X · · Score: 1

    Lol you have to be kidding. Non-Intel macs are dead, they are not being supported by a wide range of vendors, including their creator, Apple. Per Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.5

    "Leopard drops support for slower G4 and all G3 processors".

    It's just a matter of time.

  49. Um...Huh? by sexconker · · Score: 1

    So they have pictures.
    And if you zoom in, it loads the higher quality pics.
    If you zoom out, it loads the lower quality pics.

    That's nice and all, but it doesn't deserve it's own Web 2.0 style name. Sure, it does it quickly, but for all I know the damned thing could just be loading progressive jpegs in the background. Not exactly rocket science. Maybe add some logic to make it load stuff near the center of your view first. It's not magic, it shouldn't require silverlight, and I really don't care about it.

    1. Re:Um...Huh? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      the rocket science is that they didn't have to manually stitch that all together.

  50. No, but I've seen GigaPan by awtbfb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't watch much TV, but the functionality is awfully similar to GigaPan.

    1. Re:No, but I've seen GigaPan by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      ...the functionality is awfully similar to GigaPan.
      Thanks for the clarification. I can just imagine the Microsoft Press Release now, Microsoft Silverlight 3.0, the technology that brought goatse to an entire other level.
  51. Adobe Did by phreakhead · · Score: 1

    They opened Flash so you can write your own interpreter. I guess they're hoping someone else will make it less of a CPU hog.

    1. Re:Adobe Did by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      They opened Flash so you can write your own interpreter. I guess they're hoping someone else will make it less of a CPU hog.


      Well, no, they opened the VM and a partial JavaScript compiler, which is part of Flash, but not the same thing as Flash.

      I guess they're hoping someone else will make it less of a CPU hog.


      Well, they are still working on it, just letting other people work on (and use) some components of it as well. Its not like Adobe stopped being involved in Tamarin once they gave it to Mozilla.
  52. Prior art by joeslugg · · Score: 3, Informative

    As I'm reading the descriptions and seeing it on YouTube, I'm thinking I've SEEN something like this before.
    And I finally remembered; Jef Raskin's "Humane Interface".
    Zooming demo from several years ago that runs in Flash here.

    Quite similar, IMHO. Hmm?

    1. Re:Prior art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah, I've seen it dozens, maye hundreds of times before too.


      Try this one

    2. Re:Prior art by stubear · · Score: 1

      Your humble opinion is full of shit, and that's a simple fact. Perhaps you should TRY the demo instead of relying on a blurry low-res video on YouTube. While both zoom into things, the Deep Zoom technology swaps out higher-res versions of the photos dynamically as you zoom in but there's no indication of loading or swapping, it's all seamless and fluid. I saw the demo in person at the HOW Design Conference a few weeks ago and it was really amazing stuff. Too bad the UI in the Expression tools used to create Silverlight stuff suck.

  53. its called mipmapping by moogord · · Score: 1

    erm, is it just me, or is this just mipmapping? hell isn't google maps and the variants just the ultimate 'deep zoom'? i really fail to see how this is something new.

    1. Re:its called mipmapping by RealityMogul · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's pretty much mipmapping. Except the primary difference is that Microsoft has discovered a way to take this decades old 3D technology, and apply it to 2D... after everybody already had... for a couple decades.

      BTW, they can also be called thumbnails, or progressive JPEGs, and probably something else too. I'm probably forgetting some important things in computer history that could be cited as examples.

      But nobody else has done it in SilverLight!

      I didn't look that closely, is there a patent pending stamp in the lower right corner for this amazing invention?

  54. no sh** Sherlock? by city · · Score: 1

    So let me get this straight. You're saying they didn't stack a ton of memorabilia in a pile and take a picture of it?

    --
    I am a v1ral sig. Plse c0py me and h3lp me spread. Thank y0u?
  55. Anonymous Coward. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you zoom in pretty close and scan over the image and drag the image to the left or right .. you'll eventually see that each image is not really just 1 image, but made up of sections of the image that have been "pasted" together to form one larger image....
    Again, i reiterate... these are _NOT_ 1 image pictures. Zoom in and you will find lines that break the pictures apart.
    You can see this for example on the lower left corner guitar. zoom into where the neck meets the guitar and look at the right side of the neck (our right) and you'll see a vertical line where the image is split.

  56. Not impressed... by CronicBurn · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So I followed the link to http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/ - even installed the Silverlight plugin, against my best judgment just to check out this "new and exciting" technology... and it just looks like fairly high rez images. While that's all fine and dandy... it's nothing spectacular to me.

    Not to mention, when I went from http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/ to http://www.slashdot.org/ Firefox crashed. Way to go MS. Thanks for reaffirming my feelings about how fscking horrible every piece of software that comes out of your company is. /rant

    --
    if I were able to see further, it was because I stood on the shoulders of Giants -Newton
    1. Re:Not impressed... by prockcore · · Score: 1

      You aparently missed the part where silverlight 2.0 is still in beta.

  57. mip-mapping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how is this different from mip-mapping with bilinear filtering?

  58. Had this for years by CODiNE · · Score: 1

    Fotomagico photo zoom transition, notice the video demo at the top of the page: http://www.boinx.com/fotomagico/overview/storytelling/

    The real trick is finding an image with boring enough edges that you can pretend it came from the other. You'll notice on the Microsoft image demos they mostly have solid color edges except for the Planet Hollywood picture which is followed by something so busy you can't really tell where it fits in.

    I got the program at least 2 years ago with one of those $50 software bundles where you save $10 on one program you really wanted and get 4 free ones thrown in. The program is cool and all but as others have said it's just a digital magic trick. I just wanted to document this prior art incase Microsoft tries to patent it.

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  59. People can do things like this already... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ... I had seen Panorado's 360 viewer and others doing fast in-browswer pan/zoom as a Java applet for years.


    Somebody please ask them to just code this up as an applet.

  60. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keyword is 'slower'. Faster G4s and G5s (such as my 1GHz G4 w/ 512 mb ram) still run great under 10.5. Mac OS X 10.6, on the other hand...

  61. Re:Youtube video of similar demo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no Silverlight required

    Yeah, it's a shame a kick ass web site like Hard Rock Memorabilia decided to use such a crappy browser plugin. Silverlight, just what we need, yet another redundant browser plugin to allow script kiddie web 2.0 geeks to create annoying flashy sites with crappy embedded music. Isn't that why many of us already hate flash?

    But redundancy to existing standards and software is what M$ is all about! That, and churning out a large base of low skill script kiddies who think they are programmers. (think developers developers developers)

  62. uhm... so... by wolferz · · Score: 0

    What's this deep zooming technology do... cause so far I've seen nothing that cant be accomplished with some hobbled together homemade code, a dozen well made photos, and a copy of photoshop to put them together...

    In fact I've seen stuff like this before... going back to the 90s. Next thing you know we will have the new "Uber Pointers." They are these little devices that sit on your desk and when you move them a pointer on your screen moves with them. This allows you to selects stuff on the screen and even activate these things we call "Uber Buttons." Cool huh?

  63. Come on already by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

    Can someone hurry up and write a Silverlight interpreter inside of a Flash control?

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  64. Re:WTF? (Yup!... here's the demo!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'd seen this stuff before.
    Panorado's 360 viewer and others doing fast in-browswer pan/zoom as a Java applet for years.

  65. Aren't those cars more modern than '64? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That Beatles letter used as an example is weird... the cars in the hi-res stamp (much higher res than the rest of the envelope, btw) don't appear to date from '62... was that stamp just added after the fact as an example of what could be with this technology?

    Not impressed... I saw this kind of nifty zooming stuff when google maps launched...

  66. Old, old, OLD news. by jrothwell97 · · Score: 1

    This is hardly new technology. Isn't 'deep zooming' what I've been brought up to know as... well... 'zooming'?

    I believe there was a demo, around a year ago, that Steve Jobs did at WWDC to demonstrate how Mac OS X had new 64-bit exploitation abilities in Leopard. If I remember correctly, he brought up two copies of the same image, to do a 'race' (32-bit vs. 64-bit). It was a wide shot of a chamber in the Library of Congress, and it was sufficiently detailed that one could zoom in and read the labels on the spines.

    Now, with this, Jobs was demonstrating that the technology to zoom in to such hi-res images has been around for ages. It's hardly new technology.

    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
  67. How is this any different from Google Earth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, with Google Earth you can zoom through several powers of ten from planet to house... What makes this "technology" special? Because it's implemented as a browser plugin?

  68. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by attemptedgoalie · · Score: 1

    I've got the 1.42 GHz PPC Mini, and Leopard has been great, and with 10.5.3 it got even better when they fixed a graphics issue.

    If Microsoft and some websites don't want viewers, fine. Their loss.

    I think it's reasonable to only support the current and previous version of an OS. Microsoft, Red Hat and others all have that model (usually).

    Oh well, c'est la vie.

    --
    My mom says I'm cool.
  69. Why "unfortunately" by fullgandoo · · Score: 1

    On a slightly divergent note, what is "unfortunate" about Silverlight? I would have assumed that any invention that gets rid of the plague named "flash" would be welcome to the Slashdot crowd? Even something from Microsoft. Although, unfortunately I was using Safari on a Mac, Silverlight downloaded and installed automatically without a hitch. Much better than most Mac applications where I have to spend time in first minimizing the browser, resizing the downloads window, openning the Mac HD folder, openning the applications folder and then "carefully" dragging and dropping the new software to the applications folder. Only to find out later that the application was dropped somewhere else. I'm a new Mac user and I'm sure the Mac fanboys would point out the flaw in my method, but then, isn't the Mac just supposed to WORK? Yeah right!

  70. It's not all one picture -_- by aephoenix · · Score: 1

    It's a bunch of photos that were photoshopped to look like it's zooming out -_-. Even the article says so. This is nothing fascinating, you could probably do it in Flash.

  71. Enhance! by revlic · · Score: 1

    Enhance...ENHANCE! ENHANCE!!!

  72. Slightly on-topic: Hard-rock demo site by nobodyman · · Score: 1

    Anybody else catch the thank-you letter from Paul McCartney to a cop who served as his bodyguard in Miami (it's a little more than halfway down on the left side)? Four pages! How cool is that?

  73. Doesn't seem to work at all. by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

    I have FF 2.0.0.14 and all I get is a black screen at http://memorabilia.hardrock.com/

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  74. How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Vanessa Lane or Bridgette Kerkove 'Deep Zoom'?
    Think of the possibilities...

  75. Deep Zoom? *barf* by jamrock · · Score: 1

    I saw a video of this demo from TED2007 when it was called Photosynth, formerly Seadragon. Would it have killed Microsoft to have kept either of these much cooler names? I don't know which clueless marketing droid came up with this incredibly lame moniker, but he should be strapped into one of Ballmer's chairs when Uncle Fester is having his daily rant against Google/Apple/Linux.

  76. Rage? by beaverbrother · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the next id technology used for the game Rage do this on any surface?

  77. So it's a mipmap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Had this back in the UK MetOffice in 1998.

    Not all that new.

    Not all that novel.

    Not all that cool.

  78. Author sort of misses the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a better example of the uses for this technology at Photosynth (http://labs.live.com/photosynth/). One could seemingly take multiple pictures of a scene using a high-res camera, and you could literally click through it as if it were 3-d.

  79. All a demo: smoke and mirrors by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    It's a set of different res photos that are all aligned in a special mock up for a canned demo. It isn't actual zooming per se since the postage stamp printing resolution would destroy the detail.

    Setting up a single canned demo is pretty easy to do - relative to applying this "technology" in a wider automated scale.

    Sure it is cool to watch, but so is any special effect.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  80. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by Jess · · Score: 1

    WTF, Apple supports non-intel Macs. Read 5 lines up on the wikipedia site you reference: "Processor must be any Intel, PowerPC G5 or G4 (at least 867 MHz or faster)" I have no problem on my G5 with apple software. It's M$ who decided not to support non-intel macs.

  81. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  82. deep zoom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this many posts and no-one has mentioned pornography?

  83. API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is the API named Lovelace?

  84. Your bias betrays you by mozzis · · Score: 0

    "Unfortunately" it requires Silverlight?

    --
    This is not a self-referential sig.
    1. Re:Your bias betrays you by LaskoVortex · · Score: 1

      "Unfortunately" it requires Silverlight?

      Actually, what the author really meant was "Unfortunately it requires you to take 40,000 photos of a postcard with a $10,000 dollar camera." Outside of that tiny little consideration, its almost as neat as Quartz, but you need Silverlight installed.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
  85. Re:Youtube video of similar demo by prockcore · · Score: 0, Redundant

    what do you mean no silverlight required? That is silverlight. That video is from microsoft's conference.

  86. similar to zoomify by theeddie55 · · Score: 1

    this seems to do the same thing as zoomify only with a smoother interface, wake me up when they have a version I can put my own photos in, preferably for free (and preferably not using silverlight)

  87. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  88. So they invented mipmapping? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they invented mipmapping?

  89. GE by fulldecent · · Score: 1

    So... it's just like Google Earth?

    --

    -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

  90. Silverlight is microsoft's latest failure by JimboFBX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Silverlight is probably the first and only plugin that insists it isn't installed even when it is. Did it for MLB.com. MLB.com still thinks I don't have it. Did it for that website. I get this:


    Before installing this version of Silverlight, please close all browser windows and uninstall all previously installed versions of Silverlight.
    installed version 2.0.30523.6
    requested version 2.0.30226


    Does it for both I.E. and firefox. Clicking on the uninstall link gives VIDEOS instead of an actual uninstaller, not that uninstalling ever fixed my problem in the past.

  91. extreme version specificity by n9hmg · · Score: 1

    So, I fired up IE and tried to look at the demo. Of course, first it demands that I install the latest version of silverlight. After the installation, I can't see the demo because I'm above the desired version.
    installed version 2.0.30523
    requested version 2.0.30226

    What a P.O.S.!

  92. WOW! I kan has Zoom! by bill_kress · · Score: 1

    That's pretty neat.

    Of course, Google Maps can zoom smoothly from earth orbit down to my house without downloading a technology that crashes my browser 4 times in two minutes. (More than doubled my total number of browser crashes).

    But this is impressive guys. You can hardly see the pixilation until you get kinda close. It's almost as good as if those had all been separate high resolution photos with a thumbnail page.

    Almost--but keep up the good work guys! Soon you may be as good as basic HTML, and who knows, in a few years you could even rival AJAX.

  93. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

    According to a story posted on /. earlier today, the next version of OS X abandons the pre-Intel Macs, FYI.

  94. Re:Do you even know what vaporware means? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love it when Bill Gates posts to /.

  95. Well that went well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    installed version 2.0.30523.6
    requested version 2.0.30226

    Apparently my beta is too beta for them

  96. Silverlight doesn't seem to work in firefox 3 by sentientbrendan · · Score: 1

    I installed silverlight 2 beta from the download linked from the site and this is what it gives me:

    installed version 2.0.30523.6
    requested version 2.0.30226

    So the problem is that I have a *newer* version of silverlight? Or are the version strings getting mangled during comparison?

    I have firefox 3. Is anyone else running into this problem?

    1. Re:Silverlight doesn't seem to work in firefox 3 by rs232 · · Score: 1

      It works here on Firefox 2.0.0.14 ..

      --
      davecb5620@gmail.com
  97. ZUI ZUI Zoom UI Zoom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is nothing more than Raskin's Archy. ZUI's (Zooming User Interfaces) have been around for a lot longer than that as well.

  98. Obligatory Zoom Candidate by PPH · · Score: 1

    If you zoom in enough on the Goatse Guy photo, you can actually see the light shining through from the other end.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  99. Pre-cursor video and related GUI designs by FredThompson · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can watch a Seadragon presentation from TED at http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129
    focus-plus context screens are similar http://www.patrickbaudisch.com/projects/focuspluscontextscreens/index.html

  100. Google Maps anyone? by yacman · · Score: 1

    Any mapping application uses this same tech. They just swapped a photo for a map.

  101. Re:Installing Silverlighthttp://tech.slashdot.org/ by nrlightfoot · · Score: 1

    Silverlight sucks, it doesn't even support my cpu, not that I would want to install it anyway. I have an old Athlon from just before they released the Atlon XP with SSE.

    --
    what sig?
  102. Silverlight 2 Beta 2 released today by benwaggoner · · Score: 2, Informative

    Silverlight 2 Beta was actually released today.

    Runtime and SDK downloads and lots of other info about it here http://silverlight.net/GetStarted/

  103. Great way to hide your porn! by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

    I spent a good 10 minutes on there, before finding the one with the woman with the naked boobs. This technology would be a great way to hide your porn.

  104. Re:The Hard Rock site doesn't work on non-Intel Ma by PsychoSid · · Score: 1

    That must be true then

  105. Tin Man flash. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    While the scifi network mini series, "Tin Man" was painfully stupid, (I'm sorry to all the production people; you worked hard and it looked great, but the writing was horrid. Calling stuff by initials, "The Oh Zee" or calling Dorothy, "Dee Gee" was annoyingly Emm Tee Vee in the extreme), the flash promotional was really cool, creating a tunnel effect of infinite zoom. With sounds and limited animation. Flash at its most 'wow'. Plus it won't crash your browser. Keen.


    -FL

  106. Walk into the sliverlight trap please. by WhiteFluffyChest · · Score: 1

    Yes, install silverlight to see this amazing coolness, but Linux is not invited to the party.

    Instead, Linux has to play cat and mouse with homebrew mono and moonlight hacks.

    It's amazing how cool Microsoft tries to be when they want you to turn your back on Linux.

  107. Deep Zoom - So what? by ptitvert · · Score: 1

    So what?

    I don't understand why this is so... new technology... so breath taking
    Google Earth, Mandelbrot fractals, ... this technology just reuse old stuff and tell us that with Silverthing you will be able to use this wonderful technology...

    In Java, Javascript, flash, ... you can do that too.

    So, what...?

  108. Re: Didn't work by Ox0065 · · Score: 1

    Sorry Mate

    The website didn't work for me. It just popped up a box asking me to install some program..... ....all sounds pretty shifty really. (^-^) anyway, maybe next time.

    --
    thx e
  109. It isn't really a zoom on a single image by Caduceus1 · · Score: 1

    These are pictures in pictures, which provides the "resolution". Even in the demo, you can see that the image of the stamp is too perfect to be on that envelope. And then the inset of the Beatles memorabilia is superimposed on the image of the HRC. And then the image of the dolls is superimposed on that image. So you are zooming in to successive images, not zooming in on a single true image and "magically" getting higher resolution like an episode of C.S.I.

    I don't see the same features on any other part of the demo image.

    I don't see what's so novel about it.

    --
    rm /dev/mem
    Sci-Fi Storm
  110. Couldn't check TFD sorry by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    As I am on OS X and Silverlight beta 2.x doesn't exist for PPC (while Flash 10 beta exists), I couldn't check the marvellous demo.

    What I know is, Zoomify exists for years starting as a cross-platform Quicktime codec and later a Flash program. In fact, it is free to implement your sites which will run anywhere with Flash installed. (I did)

    http://www.zoomify.com/

    MS should be busy compiling their Beta for OS X/PPC since people already started to say they are a bit early for their "lag those non windows punks releases" tactic.

  111. Re:Change of pace? by mark72005 · · Score: 1

    2 GNUs 1 cup?

  112. Silverlight only .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    Only works on Silverlight and the license has this to say ..

    'INDEMNIFICATION. You agree to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Microsoft from and against any claims, allegations, lawsuits, losses and costs (including attorney fees), that arise or result the use or deployment of your "Silverlight applications"'

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  113. Panororamio's "look around" feature by illiteratewithdrawal · · Score: 1

    I haven't had a chance to play around with Microsoft's "Deep Zoom" thing or Photosynth because I doubt either would work that well on my Powerbook G4 even if it was supported on pre-Intel Macs. But, Panoramio just released something called "look around" that does work on my computer. Google talks about it on its LatLong blog. In a way it reminds me of the Photosynth demo.

  114. Deep Zoom technology .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    This sure looks like Deep Zoom and it works without Silverlight ..

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  115. deep zoom for the BBC .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    I can't see, what I get is this msg:

    "The site that you visited was built for an earlier, beta version of Silverlight - not the current one. Please contact the site owner to let them know"

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  116. What you have never downloaded a 10 mb thumnail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL

  117. Silverlight spam by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    I think I'll have to check again when the site is flash compatible.

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  118. Re:Deep Zoom? by Theoboley · · Score: 0

    lol so totally worth it

    --
    Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try