It's obviously downrezzed from it's 65MB file size, but I left it a little big (sort of) to give you some wiggle room, for those who decide to give it a go.
I know that the sky is blown on this one ... there's another series of shots that are bracketed 2-2/3 stops to reveal the sky. Very heavy overcast / rain clouds filled the sky. It's extra wide for experimental sake, and will likely get a crop to something reasonable, so feel free to take any & all liberties with it you like.
I've included one with the sky in it for reference / comp as well.
All are sooc small jpgs (except for the stitching).
There are two rationales for pano stitching. One is to cover capture more real estate in the image — which can be accomplished with a three-shot pano — and the other is to make really big prints which have the same "reading distance" detail at 18" as an 8" x 12" print does — which requires more exposures.
Here the downsizing the image for display has negated the benefits of shooting and stitching to capture the image scene with more resolution and the net result here looking worse than a single exposure capture would. Three images stitched together would look better on screen because it would need less downsampling to fit.
Something to also keep in mind when selecting scene for panos is how beyond reading distance the human perception process changes, relying less on the micro-detail and texture and more on contrast differences to discern shape. That's why images with contrasting well defined large geometric shapes as the focal point, such as a sailboat on the ocean, work better than a scene like this one in big enlargements. Lacking a focal point with shapes well defined by planar tonal variation like a 3D wireframe it tends to becomes a sea of sameness with no strongly defined focal point contrasting with the background as viewing distance increases and less and less detail is resolved.
What is needed to make a big print with reading distance realism work effectively is a combination of starting with a scene that would reproduce well as silk screen poster art captured the pixel per output inch resolution needed to reproduce the print at acceptable "reading distance" resolution of detail when the viewer walks up close to look.
A good example was the pano created at the last US inauguration on the Capitol steps using a P&S camera. It works on one level because of the contrasting recognized geometric shapes of the building framing the sea of faces sets the scene, and on another because the detail and expression on every single one of the thousands of faces is seen. In a photo like this the detail of every blade of grass and leaf on tree just isn't as important to the message of the photo so in terms of goals at capture the need for 20+ exposures isn't as necessary.
The way perception changes with viewing distance is something poster artists and painters realized long ago and incorporated into their work. In the case of silk screen poster they only had a limited gamut of colors and out of necessity the images are created from large contrasting planes like a crudely rendered wireframe. Artists like John Singer Sargent figured out to use contrast to create the illusion of sharpness in much the same way USM makes digital images seem sharper. Singer created larger than life portraits. Viewed from across a gallery they appear highly detailed but when examined closely are seen to have the paint applied like a trowel with a palette knife. What creates the illusion of detail is how he applied the white paint to create shape defining specular highlights.
Upon seeing the small areas that PS used for each layer, I certainly could have gone with about 1/2 or 1/3 as many shots, but I went with overkill for distortion safety sake ... as I 'rounded' the range.
I'll likely pare this one back quite a bit in order to focus on the snow. It's a tough scene with the low contrast lighting (something leaves don't seem to care much for) and the distance (haze) to the snow.
Working from the other set, I'm trying to get a good mask for the sky, or some other isolation. I would have loved to wait for the lighting and haze to lift, but (as I guessed correctly) the snow on the mountain melted off by the time the conditions improved ... so it was this or no snow. It is the contradiction of the snow, the colors & the moody sky that were appealing. Likely to be a very challenging effort to get this where I'd like to have it.
It'll be interesting to see how far I can take it.
RustyBug wrote:
Working from the other set, I'm trying to get a good mask for the sky, or some other isolation. I would have loved to wait for the lighting and haze to lift, but (as I guessed correctly) the snow on the mountain melted off by the time the conditions improved ... so it was this or no snow. It is the contradiction of the snow, the colors & the moody sky that were appealing.
Sometimes conditions conspire to prevent an effective capture.
The early dusting of snow is unusual, but not necessarily photogenic. This is a situation where I would have assessed the situation, left the camera in the bag and just enjoyed the moment.
Enjoyed the moment(s) ... assessed the situation, saw a challenging situation ... gave it a stab, we'll see how photogenic it can become.
For some, it's more about the destination, for others it is the journey that they most greatly aspire ... wherever that may lead. Good, bad or indifferent, it's all good for learning.
