How many pictures do actually \"see\" the paper out of 1000 digital frames? And how many of those we really happy with?
The stitching approach looks nice until you try it...The following limitations become obvious:
1. Too much techical stuff...it makes the shotter too busy working...Beside the need in calculating shots per scene, watching for moving objects the composition details often take the back seat...We do not really know what we\'re taking until the frames are glued together in software...The entire fun of taking pictures goes away...
2. Gost objects in the final frame... Look at the first image...Headless guy on the bridge... He has been in the frame for 3 times already...The walking couple is headless as well...The blue car on the right is in the frame twise...
3. If there is a moving water or a wind - forget about stiching...
4. A big limitation comes from the fact that high definition results can not contain a combination of foreground and background objects...High def results require multiple frames to bee stitched together... It means it requires long focal lenth lens to be utilized. The mid to telephoto range lenses have limited depth of filed (DOF). Which means either background or foreground will be out of focus...To overcome limited DOF one has to use wide-angle lenses. How many frames do we need to cover 180 degree with a 21 mm lens on a full-frame body (5-6)? And sometimes even 21 is not wide enough...
5. No matter how good of a job the stitching software does - unless the frames are taken with a well corrected for a distortion leneses (means say good bye to most of WA lenses) the final image inherits some of the distortions. It hard to find the words to describe that but it just does not look perfect as if the same scene would have been taken as a single shot...
Nov 28, 2009 at 01:51 PM
Previous versions of SergeyT's message #7828337 « High Definition Panos »
