Upload & Sell: Off
| p.2 #5 · 16 Gigapixel Machu Picchu with Canon 100-400mm lens |
If you don't have something nice to say....
Also, I bet there isn't a higher resolution picture out there.
I donít think Guari is trying to say anything bad or trying to discredit the team who has spent a large sum of money and effort getting there to capture the images. But what he said does have some truth in it.
As one who has been there and knew the condition they were in, and also having shot both film and digital as well as getting involved in the design and testing of photographic equipment, I do agree that the 1,920 stitched images taken with a 7D and a 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L zoom lens is a little over done.
Even though the final 16 Giga Pixel image has lots of pixel in it, there is also lots of misinformation due to software interpolation.
As one can see the 7D do have lots of tiny pixels due to the fact that it has a cropped sensor, together with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L lens which has a distortion level of -0.6% Barrel at 100mm to it best at 0.25% Pinch at 400mm. With a total of 1,920 images there will be lots of interpolation error due to distortion, the shadows casted by the moving sun, the movement caused by wind on the greenery and finally the movement of animals (the IIamas and Guanacos that were kept there for tourism) and tourists. Because of the numerous joins from the 1,920 frame edges, there is already lots of misinformation due to the lens distortion, plus that of the moving shadows which will even contribute more to the misinformation, and then there is the wind that caused the movement of trees and bushes which will make it even more difficult to interpolate between one row and the next or a column to the next, please do remember that they are taking a very small section at a time and in order to complete the 1,920 images it will take them a couple of hours. From what I know they started late in the morning with the sun casting a shadow directly above and slightly behind, by the time they have finished the sun would have been casting the shadow from the front. Because of this the final stitched image looks mushy except for the stationary stone structure.
I was trying to look at the path that we used to climbed up Huayna Picchu with ropes and found that the greenery there is totally garbage due to movement and digitization. No, the ropes are no more there, being replace by a stone path and erosion walls up till the very top just below the peak.
I than project my close to 30 years old slightly discolored slides on a silver breaded projection screen taken with my F3T and a 50mm f/1.2 @ f/5.6 or f8 and compare that to the 16 GP image on my 32 inch Full HD Screen at about the same image size and found that my slide image looks a lot better with more details.
Truly, to overcome this they should have use a high MP camera like the D800/E with an 85mm, 105mm or a 135mm prime lens with low distortion level and stitch it with just 5 frames or 9 frames that will give better results. One would ask why an 85mm, 105mm or a 135mm prime? That is because the whole image can be taken with a 50mm with an angle of view of 46į. To use minimum frames will give less interpolation errors.
Stitching is only for die-die must have that image type of situation, or else it would be better off with just a single capture.