Wow! This is one awesome thread, great idea. Carsten, those car shots are excellent. Daniel, I think I've said it a dozen times - AWESOME! Caldiar - its not that difficult. If I can do it.....
Well, we now have panos in all different sizes We should perhaps agree on a max width. It would make the thread a lot more enjoyable in the long run, I think. How about 1200? That should fit on most computers, but is a little larger than normal shots, which helps the presentation.
Could we see that one in a bigger size somewhere? This one looks so intriguingly beautiful and serene. And I like Lake Louise.
@Daniel: Stunning panos! I think #1 is my favourite though. Did you use a GND in the last two? It looks a bit odd how the top half of the trees/mountains go dark so much (except in the middle of the frame).
Caldiar wrote:
Some great landscape panoramas here. Don't you have trouble blending the individual shots? I never tried myself but I imagine water to be difficult since it's moving all the time. Maybe I underestimate the capabilities of the stitching softwares.
My biggest hurdle is when you have a line such as a handrail, fence, curbs, etc...
near the to the camera and in frame but have not corrected for parallax.
The secret with water is to use a longer shutter to soften things up.
I think I'm getting the urge to shoot more panos again thanks to this thread.
carstenw wrote:
Well, we now have panos in all different sizes We should perhaps agree on a max width. It would make the thread a lot more enjoyable in the long run, I think. How about 1200? That should fit on most computers, but is a little larger than normal shots, which helps the presentation.
No.
Besides Fred already defined it. "A reasonable height and just let run off the end as needed." (paraphrased).
carstenw wrote:
Kent, what kind of panoramas do you want to do, multi-row or single-row. If the latter, and if you already have anything from RRS, then I would recommend their panorama rail. I also use Autopano Pro.
I don't think rails are needed for either given current software abilities.
Here's one that's like 4 across and 6 high - all handheld with a 28mm prime:
Besides Fred already defined it. "A reasonable height and just let run off the end as needed." (paraphrased).
agreed, my panos look like crap that small looking at them now. i think 800 high or more and let them run as far as they can. you can't really see any of the fine detail that makes panos special at the small sizes.
The floodgates are open. It seems I'm not the only one with a long-time interest in combining images!
Panos naturally lend themselves to slightly more care or thought about the subject, so it's not surprising that the average pano might be considered more dramatic or better executed than the typical single shot. Still, the level of expertise shown here is truly striking.
If we can make this thread a clearing house of top quality panoramic imaging, along with the basics of "how-to", software, and gear, I think this could be a valuable resource (and outlet) for photographers.
There are already too many great shots to compliment each author, but special thanks to sebboh, rosti, bifurcator, and thrice. Really awe-inspiring work.
As I said at the beginning, loosely termed, any equipment used for pano is "Alt" -- I'd like to leave it open to all types of gear, even if that means a matching manufacturer body/lens combos, since the result is "out of the ordinary" useage, which is what "Alternative" really stands for.
Gunzorro wrote:
My main question is simple: was this a 3-shot shifted pano?
Yes, with front movements only (no compensating back shift). Parallax wasn't a concern because every visible image element (the sky, each bank of windows) appeared _completely_ in at least one frame and the building itself showed no detail.
Personally, I'm always intrigued by contrasts in tone and color. The blue/blue-violet/yellow are all quite impressive. I can understand that it's not what you intended, but it makes a strong statement.
Yeah, the tonality and most of the colors are good (at least, good enough for me). When I'm looking for the best tonality and color I average multiple exposures--3 shots at ISO 100 gets you incredibly smooth images if your exposures aren't too long. 4 shots at ISO 400 gets you surprisingly good results too. More shots than that and I can't see any increase in quality.
This image is 9 shots at ISO 100 (for the building) and 4 shots at ISO 400 (for the sky). I woulda shot the sky at ISO 100 and increased the shutter speed, but a busted cable release limited me to 30 second exposures. The 30 second limit also had me stuck at f8, which gave me insufficient depth of field to get the closest elements in focus.
carstenw wrote:
Well, we now have panos in all different sizes We should perhaps agree on a max width. It would make the thread a lot more enjoyable in the long run, I think. How about 1200? That should fit on most computers, but is a little larger than normal shots, which helps the presentation.
Bifurcator wrote:
No.
Besides Fred already defined it. "A reasonable height and just let run off the end as needed." (paraphrased).
sebboh wrote:
agreed, my panos look like crap that small looking at them now. i think 800 high or more and let them run as far as they can. you can't really see any of the fine detail that makes panos special at the small sizes.
Very cool guy too - as I'm sure several other people here can attest to.
DOF stacking has very little to do with panorama stitching, but Zerene stacker certainly is a cool piece of software. Much easier to use than CombineZP.
Gunzorro, thanks for the nice words.
The pic you mention was shot with a TS-E 24L II on a 5D (classic, not mk2). It's a single shot, not a pano stitch. Some here have described this lens as having Zeiss-like rendering. I can't comment on this, since I own no Zeiss for small format, but I can tell that it's by far the best lens I've ever used.
Regarding this shot, however, there might have been some heavy pp: I can't check now, but I can remember using the "clear" picture style in DPP to fight back the thick fog.
My lens lineup for that trip is complemented by a EF 70-200/4 L IS USM. Yes, two lens total
Gunzorro wrote:
If we can make this thread a clearing house of top quality panoramic imaging, along with the basics of "how-to", software, and gear, I think this could be a valuable resource (and outlet) for photographers.
oh, I was about to write this myself!
In particular, I'd like to know if anyone has succeeded in stitching a group of (typically 5) photos obtained by shifting a lens from one end to the other (camera on tripod, of course). Hugin automatic functions fail miserably and I have to struggle a lot to get just decent results. Before you ask: no big parallax issues.
Here's a different portrayal of the original Canon 50mm Macro shot above, with a stretched perspective, and uncropped to a wide rectangle (only sides were minimum cropped).
We should perhaps agree on a max width. It would make the thread a lot more enjoyable in the long run, I think. How about 1200? That should fit on most computers, but is a little larger than normal shots, which helps the presentation.
