Oh yeah...! I'm glad to step into your shoes, because at the moment I've been looking into Vr, just to discover this much :
-VR is not VR ! production of a Vr 360° is at heart something that's out of reach of the ordinary video fan : one just doesn't have the streams require to get it working (4 at ground level, +2 above head and below).
.. sure you can get that from a special camera, only it's not VR, it's plain reality, albeit distrorted .. a kind of "fake vid"?
- Your use of photos is a nice workaround to obtain "equidistance" for good : the photo is flat, and the fish-eye distortion limited.
As I get it, 360, or now 180 degree clips set the distance of the cenbter pic and that of the edges at the same level, hardly conceivable for a photograph .. unless "virtual"
Personal stream of reasoning :
- VR as out a camera is OK only if your focus is on subjects at the distance (you can't use tracking, as the subjetct itself is constantly updated). Typically, the best clip I watched was 360° inside a plane cockpit.
- If that is so, you(re stuck with pictures for footage, and zooming or panning for effects. The best example of the technique is maybe in Windows' "idle screen" featuring a view of the Alps, which is gorgeous.
- VR based on video is inadequate for story telling : the "film director" cannot provide more than one focus in a scene ..
if you're distracted from the bride during wedding it means you're gettig bored! consequently, providing 5 "extyra screens is un realistic. Picture yourself in a TV station in front of mulktiple screens, is that what you want when watching TV?
My most sought after technique : yours, guy, only subtituting video for photos, with the attached size limit of 4k.. the quest goes on, and my support!