First, let me say that this photo is stunning. I've tried night shots and I can't come close.
But let me also add that the stitching artifact which others have mentioned did jump out to me, too. Since you haven't seen what they are talking about, I've uploaded an image that points it out. Please take a look at it if you want, and then I will delete if you want me to.
First, let me say that this photo is stunning. I've tried night shots and I can't come close.
But let me also add that the stitching artifact which others have mentioned did jump out to me, too. Since you haven't seen what they are talking about, I've uploaded an image that points it out. Please take a look at it if you want, and then I will delete if you want me to.
Yes, Matt, I took a look at the sudden drop of the mountain there. I also took a look at the original files. Whatever the reason there was a glitch there with the posted pano image. Obviously, I have stitched the original 17 vertical shots at this time and the processing is in progress. I am so glad you took a close look and found the place where the stitching was not done properly. Again, thank you, Matt!!
No problem! As I said, the image is amazing. I think that little area could be fixed with some simple cloning. No need to rerun the whole process, because it got most of the sky right.
Matt Tilghman wrote:
No problem! As I said, the image is amazing. I think that little area could be fixed with some simple cloning. No need to rerun the whole process, because it got most of the sky right.
Yes, that is a very reasonable option. Thanks Matt for checking the image thoroughly!!
I do have this pano image to be printed within a month for some presentation.
Just saw this one today, awesome work. I skimmed the prior posts and didn't see it...hopefully I didn't miss it. So I'll ask.
How the heck do you accomplish this? And I don't mean the stitching. Everytime I've gone out to shoot the MW, from shot to shot there is significant movement of the MW across the sky. So even if you did those 13 shots back to back with no delay, there's still a difference of about 6 minutes from the first exposure to the last...and the MW would definitely have changed position. In my attempts, this has meant it's been impossible to stitch in any meaningful way So, how'd you do it?
Max_Pain wrote:
Just saw this one today, awesome work. I skimmed the prior posts and didn't see it...hopefully I didn't miss it. So I'll ask.
How the heck do you accomplish this? And I don't mean the stitching. Everytime I've gone out to shoot the MW, from shot to shot there is significant movement of the MW across the sky. So even if you did those 13 shots back to back with no delay, there's still a difference of about 6 minutes from the first exposure to the last...and the MW would definitely have changed position. In my attempts, this has meant it's been impossible to stitch in any meaningful way So, how'd you do it?...Show more →
---------------------------------------------
Jred wrote:
Fantastic!
Thanks kmunroe, Max_Pain, & Jred for your comments and feedback.
Sorry for the late response!
I have been away for a while and am back home.
As to the question Max_Pain has .. "How the heck do you accomplish this?.."..
The series of getting 13 shots perhaps took 6 min or so as you suspect, but each consecutive shot takes less than 30 sec or so. The Milky Way, I am sure have changed or shifted the position but it seems that the stitching was most of time successful. I check the exposure while I am rotating the camera to make sure. Sometimes, for another instances, I had to adjust the exposure if needed. However for this set, I didm;t have to. I hope you have the better luck next time. BTW, I do have the shifting in a more smaller fashion that what the classic suggestion of 30% overlap... Thanks again!!
So, how'd you do it?