info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Creating A Panorama From Old Photos
9 views
Skip to first unread message
Java Jive
Dec 7, 2020, 7:51:12 PM12/7/20
to
Apologies for the cross-posting - this is a post about a problem
that might be solved either using Linux or Windows software, I have
both available as below.
Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
As you can see, I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
to make these joins much less obvious.
I'm using Hugin Panorama Creator on a Linux machine to actually do the
stitching, but to manipulate individual photos, in principle at least,
I could use either the Linux or Windows software that I have
installed, which is as follows, but note that I'm most familiar with
Paint Shop Pro v8, so minimal instructions will probably enough to
guide me for that, but for any other software I would probably need
more complete instructions to help me.
Linux: GIMP
Windows 7: IrfanView
Paint
Paint Shop Pro 8
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
--
========================================================
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html
that might be solved either using Linux or Windows software, I have
both available as below.
Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
As you can see, I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
to make these joins much less obvious.
I'm using Hugin Panorama Creator on a Linux machine to actually do the
stitching, but to manipulate individual photos, in principle at least,
I could use either the Linux or Windows software that I have
installed, which is as follows, but note that I'm most familiar with
Paint Shop Pro v8, so minimal instructions will probably enough to
guide me for that, but for any other software I would probably need
more complete instructions to help me.
Linux: GIMP
Windows 7: IrfanView
Paint
Paint Shop Pro 8
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
--
========================================================
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html
Big Al
Dec 7, 2020, 8:56:20 PM12/7/20
to
and make one side darker/lighter to make the splice less obvious it would be better than it is. But you've done a great job. Or just edit
the panorama itself, but that might cause your photo editor a hemorrhage.
Al
--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.0 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570, Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory
Paul
Dec 7, 2020, 10:27:48 PM12/7/20
to
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/product/computational-photography-applications/image-composite-editor/
Automatic exposure blending.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=52459 # Version 2.0.3
Hasn't changed in five years, implying the developer
has left the building.
The larger the input images, the more impossibly large the
hardware requirements. For example, it will demand a 2TB scratch
partition to work in. Or use more than 80GB of RAM. Test with
small images first perhaps :-) When the problem does not fit into
RAM, the processing rate is 1.5MB/sec or so (for that 2TB scratch
drive).
Not a good idea to run on Windows 10, unless you pull the network
cable so the machine is air gapped during the run. Do all your updates
reboots on Windows 10 before starting a run (keep updating and
rebooting Windows 10 until it stops taking/doing updates). On
other OSes you have sufficient control to not need this degree of care.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stitching
"Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
Many other programs can also stitch multiple images; a popular
example is Adobe Systems' Photoshop, which includes a tool known as
Photomerge and, in the latest versions, the new Auto-Blend.
Other programs such as VideoStitch make it possible to stitch videos,
and Vahana VR enables real-time video stitching. Image Stitching
module for QuickPHOTO microscope software enables to interactively
stitch together multiple fields of view from microscope using
camera's live view. It can be also used for manual stitching
of whole microscopy samples."
Maybe Hugin for Linux ?
Paul
Andy Burns
Dec 8, 2020, 3:39:39 AM12/8/20
to
Java Jive wrote:
> I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
> the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
> in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
> constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
> to make these joins much less obvious.
In any paint package you can set image levels (colour/levels,
> I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
> the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
> in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
> constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
> to make these joins much less obvious.
colours/curves from menu etc) they have "auto" settings, but I've never
tried to adjust a set of images to match, I should think you could make
them better, but not seamless.
You could use stacking/blending of layers to make the transitions less
obvious, I've used ptgui/hugin/panotools but can't remember if they have
an options to export the aligned images for you to customise by "hand" ...
Mayayana
Dec 8, 2020, 9:50:28 AM12/8/20
to
"Java Jive" <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote
| www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
|
That's a tough one. I guess if it were me I'd try a combination
of hue/saturation/lightness adjustments and maybe a wash. You
could do something like taking the color from the left-side sky
and do one or more flood fills at 10% opacity. You could also
try lightening the left side. Either way you'll lose some image
clarity, which is already quite bad. If it were me I'd leave it
alone and just enjoy what you have. But if I were going to do
it I'd use PSP.
Adobe supposedly hase dummy functions that can stitch
together mages, remove objects, and so on, but at best that
would just calculate a gradient where the images meet. So
they'd blend better but probably wouldn't look right. After all,
one side of the valley shouldn't be in dusk while the other is
at 2PM.
time zone.
| www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
|
That's a tough one. I guess if it were me I'd try a combination
of hue/saturation/lightness adjustments and maybe a wash. You
could do something like taking the color from the left-side sky
and do one or more flood fills at 10% opacity. You could also
try lightening the left side. Either way you'll lose some image
clarity, which is already quite bad. If it were me I'd leave it
alone and just enjoy what you have. But if I were going to do
it I'd use PSP.
Adobe supposedly hase dummy functions that can stitch
together mages, remove objects, and so on, but at best that
would just calculate a gradient where the images meet. So
they'd blend better but probably wouldn't look right. After all,
one side of the valley shouldn't be in dusk while the other is
at 2PM.
time zone.
Ken Hart
Dec 8, 2020, 3:13:47 PM12/8/20
to
before attempting to stitch them.
Alternatively, you might consider having some sort of divider between
each photo. The viewer was mentally put the photos together.
As a photography student years (many years!) ago, I once wanted a giant
enlargement, larger than I had photo paper for. I found an old
multi-pane window at a junk shop, and made the constituent photos to fit
in the pane openings. Once I was done, it looked like one big photo,
albeit through a window.
--
Ken Hart
kwh...@frontier.com
Java Jive
Dec 9, 2020, 12:24:42 PM12/9/20
to
Thanks for that, the delay in replying was caused by my thinking it
wise to back up the OS partition before installing it. It's
surprisingly modest in executable size and resource requirements, and
therefore quick in execution, but, while it certainly did a grand job
on the exposure problem, the stitching was far less good than I got
from Hugin, and there doesn't seem to be a way to improve it by manual
intervention:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2_(ICE).png
Note that the distant horizon is not even approximately level,
something of a giveaway that things have gone badly wrong!
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stitching
>
> "Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
> Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
>
> Many other programs can also stitch multiple images; a popular
> example is Adobe Systems' Photoshop, which includes a tool known as
> Photomerge and, in the latest versions, the new Auto-Blend.
>
> Other programs such as VideoStitch make it possible to stitch videos,
> and Vahana VR enables real-time video stitching. Image Stitching
> module for QuickPHOTO microscope software enables to interactively
> stitch together multiple fields of view from microscope using
> camera's live view. It can be also used for manual stitching
> of whole microscopy samples."
> Maybe Hugin for Linux ?
stitching but the mismatched exposure problem.
Paul
Dec 9, 2020, 2:26:46 PM12/9/20
to
I just tried the "Structured Panorama" option, and maybe that
will work better. I don't think the test input I'm using right
now, is good enough. I thought I had enough overlap for this.
The Structured Panorama managed to stitch some of my planar input,
but it's still rather a mess.
Paul
Java Jive
Dec 9, 2020, 7:36:52 PM12/9/20
to
On Wed, 09 Dec 2020 14:26:43 -0500, Paul <nos...@needed.invalid>
wrote:
roll, pitch, and yaw all to 0 - I'm not sure why they were any
different to begin with, as I hadn't knowingly changed them, but at
least things are a little straightened out now. You can see the
result at the same URL above.
However, I can't find any way of altering how the stitching is done,
so I think I'll have to investigate something else next.
> I just tried the "Structured Panorama" option, and maybe that
> will work better. I don't think the test input I'm using right
> now, is good enough. I thought I had enough overlap for this.
> The Structured Panorama managed to stitch some of my planar input,
> but it's still rather a mess.
Perhaps you've found this already, but in the FAQs it's states:
"https://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/806bf0c5-af8f-4526-9b90-6d28096441d2/faq-frequently-asked-questions-for-image-composite-editor?forum=ice
Operation
What's the difference between a "Simple panorama" and a
"Structured panorama"?
Simple panorama: Use this choice when you want to stitch together
photos that were shot by hand. You should also use this choice if you
used a tripod, but didn't carefully space the photos in a regular grid
of equal angles. ICE will automatically determine the relationships
between the photos.
Structured panorama: Use this option if you shot a regular
rectangular grid of photos using a robotic panoramic capture device
(like the GigaPan devices) or a specially-designed panoramic tripod
head. Structured panoramas require that your images can be assigned
to the rows or columns of a rectangular grid simply by listing the
files in order by name or by date. ICE can take advantage of this
regular structure to process very large sets of images (hundreds or
thousands of photos), since it doesn't have to look for feature
matches between all pairs of images. If your photos weren't shot in a
rectangular grid pattern, you should be using "New Panorama" instead."
So I'm guessing that Simple Panorama is the right option for me.
wrote:
>
> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for that, the delay in replying was caused by my thinking it
>> wise to back up the OS partition before installing it. It's
>> surprisingly modest in executable size and resource requirements, and
>> therefore quick in execution, but, while it certainly did a grand job
>> on the exposure problem, the stitching was far less good than I got
>> from Hugin, and there doesn't seem to be a way to improve it by manual
>> intervention:
>>
>> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2_(ICE).png
>>
>> Note that the distant horizon is not even approximately level,
>> something of a giveaway that things have gone badly wrong!
I've at least managed to correct this problem now, by setting the
> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for that, the delay in replying was caused by my thinking it
>> wise to back up the OS partition before installing it. It's
>> surprisingly modest in executable size and resource requirements, and
>> therefore quick in execution, but, while it certainly did a grand job
>> on the exposure problem, the stitching was far less good than I got
>> from Hugin, and there doesn't seem to be a way to improve it by manual
>> intervention:
>>
>> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2_(ICE).png
>>
>> Note that the distant horizon is not even approximately level,
>> something of a giveaway that things have gone badly wrong!
roll, pitch, and yaw all to 0 - I'm not sure why they were any
different to begin with, as I hadn't knowingly changed them, but at
least things are a little straightened out now. You can see the
result at the same URL above.
However, I can't find any way of altering how the stitching is done,
so I think I'll have to investigate something else next.
> I just tried the "Structured Panorama" option, and maybe that
> will work better. I don't think the test input I'm using right
> now, is good enough. I thought I had enough overlap for this.
> The Structured Panorama managed to stitch some of my planar input,
> but it's still rather a mess.
"https://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/806bf0c5-af8f-4526-9b90-6d28096441d2/faq-frequently-asked-questions-for-image-composite-editor?forum=ice
Operation
What's the difference between a "Simple panorama" and a
"Structured panorama"?
Simple panorama: Use this choice when you want to stitch together
photos that were shot by hand. You should also use this choice if you
used a tripod, but didn't carefully space the photos in a regular grid
of equal angles. ICE will automatically determine the relationships
between the photos.
Structured panorama: Use this option if you shot a regular
rectangular grid of photos using a robotic panoramic capture device
(like the GigaPan devices) or a specially-designed panoramic tripod
head. Structured panoramas require that your images can be assigned
to the rows or columns of a rectangular grid simply by listing the
files in order by name or by date. ICE can take advantage of this
regular structure to process very large sets of images (hundreds or
thousands of photos), since it doesn't have to look for feature
matches between all pairs of images. If your photos weren't shot in a
rectangular grid pattern, you should be using "New Panorama" instead."
So I'm guessing that Simple Panorama is the right option for me.
Mike
Dec 10, 2020, 7:50:03 AM12/10/20
to
In article <5aq2tfposnne8sbua...@4ax.com>,
A "structured panorama" is a panorama and tiltorama combined.
HTH. :)
It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
mean that ...)
--
--------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk
Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> What's the difference between a "Simple panorama" and a
>"Structured panorama"?
A "simple panorama" *is* a panorama.
> What's the difference between a "Simple panorama" and a
>"Structured panorama"?
A "structured panorama" is a panorama and tiltorama combined.
HTH. :)
It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
mean that ...)
--
--------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk
Java Jive
Dec 10, 2020, 12:47:04 PM12/10/20
to
On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 22:27:44 -0500, Paul <nos...@needed.invalid>
wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
> >
> > Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
> > Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> > enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> > almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> > accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> > lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> > them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
> >
> > www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
>
because again there is no manual control over it, nor ICE for exposure
reconciliation, but a good compromise. However, missed out the RH
slide for some reason, probably because it couldn't locate stitching
points:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2_(Autostitch).jpg
wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
> >
> > Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
> > Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> > enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> > almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> > accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> > lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> > them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
> >
> > www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stitching
>
> "Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
> Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
AutoStitch is quite good - not as good as Hugin for stitching
>
> "Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
> Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
because again there is no manual control over it, nor ICE for exposure
reconciliation, but a good compromise. However, missed out the RH
slide for some reason, probably because it couldn't locate stitching
points:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2_(Autostitch).jpg
J. P. Gilliver (John)
Dec 10, 2020, 2:05:28 PM12/10/20
to
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:44:17, Mike <m...@signal11.invalid> wrote (my
responses usually follow points raised):
[]
mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
of such a word?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
Norman Tebbitt has the irritating quality of being much nicer in person than
he is in print. - Clive Anderson, RT 1996/10/12-18
responses usually follow points raised):
[]
>It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
>waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
>say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
>mean that ...)
>
It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
>waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
>say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
>mean that ...)
>
mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
of such a word?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
Norman Tebbitt has the irritating quality of being much nicer in person than
he is in print. - Clive Anderson, RT 1996/10/12-18
nospam
Dec 10, 2020, 2:12:41 PM12/10/20
to
In article <Ub0W$npiFn...@255soft.uk>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
<https://www.manfrotto.com/us-en/xpro-geared-three-way-pan-tilt-tripod-h
ead-mhxpro-3wg/>
<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
> >It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
> >waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
> >say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
> >mean that ...)
> >
> It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
> mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
> slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
> But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
> vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
> of such a word?
tilt, although vertical pan is sometimes used.
> >It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
> >waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
> >say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
> >mean that ...)
> >
> It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
> mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
> slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
> But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
> vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
> of such a word?
<https://www.manfrotto.com/us-en/xpro-geared-three-way-pan-tilt-tripod-h
ead-mhxpro-3wg/>
Char Jackson
Dec 10, 2020, 7:02:19 PM12/10/20
to
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 19:05:06 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:44:17, Mike <m...@signal11.invalid> wrote (my
>responses usually follow points raised):
>[]
>>It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
>>waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
>>say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
>>mean that ...)
>>
>It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
>mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
>slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
>But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
>vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
>of such a word?
As nospam said, it's tilt. You've probably seen cameras advertised as PTZ,
<G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:44:17, Mike <m...@signal11.invalid> wrote (my
>responses usually follow points raised):
>[]
>>It seems the word "panorama" has morphed to include *any*
>>waving around of the camera in any direction (e.g. when people
>>say things like "Pan the camera up!" when they don't really
>>mean that ...)
>>
>It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
>mostly horizontally: it could include along-ground where ground has a
>slope, like a sloping street) - though I think you are probably right.
>But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
>vertical) movement while shooting - and I can't think of it: anyone know
>of such a word?
referring to (horizontal) pan, (vertical) tilt, and (Z-axis) zoom.
--
Char Jackson
Mike
Dec 10, 2020, 7:20:04 PM12/10/20
to
In article <Ub0W$npiFn...@255soft.uk>,
or "larger" (generic) area.
"Filmed in Panavision!" -- wasn't that the "new" wider format for film
(involving anamorphic lenses and such) for a better experience?
>But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
>vertical) movement while shooting
There is, that's why I (joked) "tiltorama" :)
J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6...@255soft.uk> wrote:
>It had never occurred to me that "pan" only means horizontally (or
>mostly horizontally:
My cOED says "View of a wide area" -- nothing about a "tall" (vertical)
>mostly horizontally:
or "larger" (generic) area.
"Filmed in Panavision!" -- wasn't that the "new" wider format for film
(involving anamorphic lenses and such) for a better experience?
>But if you are, there must (?) be a word for vertical (or mostly
>vertical) movement while shooting
Savageduck
Dec 10, 2020, 8:11:32 PM12/10/20
to
On Dec 10, 2020, Char Jackson wrote
(in article<ukd5tf538pa9gde88...@4ax.com>):
Regardless of horizontal, or vertical pan, the software used must be capable of addressing, via appropriate projection (cylindrical, spherical, etc) the focal length of the lens used, which should be constant for each captured frame to be stitched.
Issues such as exposure, and white balance for each frame should also be considered, as exposure/WB settings for the first frame of the pano frame group are not going to be the same for the final frame. Sometimes you can be lucky with auto exposure, and auto White balance being good enough, but very often it isn’t. When it isn’t you are likely to find noticeable, and difficult to correct frame boundaries, and/or banding in the sky.
A good tripod with a pan head will help deliver better results than a handheld pano.
This was a handheld pano:
<https://photos.smugmug.com/SA-2018/i-Z6Xm55B/0/62672f51/O/_DSF0332.jpg>
These days I find a drone to be a great tool for capturing panoramas.
<https://photos.smugmug.com/Air-2-Work/i-qx457Mp/0/f47e5f0f/O/DJI_0074.jpg>
--
Regards,
Savageduck
(in article<ukd5tf538pa9gde88...@4ax.com>):
Issues such as exposure, and white balance for each frame should also be considered, as exposure/WB settings for the first frame of the pano frame group are not going to be the same for the final frame. Sometimes you can be lucky with auto exposure, and auto White balance being good enough, but very often it isn’t. When it isn’t you are likely to find noticeable, and difficult to correct frame boundaries, and/or banding in the sky.
A good tripod with a pan head will help deliver better results than a handheld pano.
This was a handheld pano:
<https://photos.smugmug.com/SA-2018/i-Z6Xm55B/0/62672f51/O/_DSF0332.jpg>
These days I find a drone to be a great tool for capturing panoramas.
<https://photos.smugmug.com/Air-2-Work/i-qx457Mp/0/f47e5f0f/O/DJI_0074.jpg>
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Char Jackson
Dec 11, 2020, 1:23:10 AM12/11/20
to
--
Char Jackson
Savageduck
Dec 11, 2020, 5:22:06 AM12/11/20
to
On Dec 10, 2020, Char Jackson wrote
(in article<7146tf59dh932cjip...@4ax.com>):
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Char Jackson
Dec 11, 2020, 12:32:57 PM12/11/20
to
On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 02:22:01 -0800, Savageduck
Nice!
--
Char Jackson
--
Char Jackson
NY
Dec 11, 2020, 3:28:52 PM12/11/20
to
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.2582FEBF00...@news.giganews.com...
you get with handheld panoramas where the camera may rotate (about an axis
through the lens) between photos.
I tend to always lock the exposure, white balance and focus (*) before
taking a panorama. I rarely have a tripod with me so mine are handheld. I've
used Panavue which is moderately good and Photoshop Elements 11 which is
remarkably good. Panavue has the advantage that it allows you to define
equivalent points in overlapping photos, to help in matching photos; PSE has
no manual control - but seems to manage without.
I did a test once: one photo with a wide angle lens (28 mm equivalent) and a
rectangular grid of photos that covered the same area with a standard lens
(50 mm equivalent), and the results after joining the 50 mm ones were more
similar to the 28 mm one than I was expecting.
(*) Focus locking is important if there's a chance that a close object may
fool the autofocus in shifting from infinity for one photo.
news:0001HW.2582FEBF00...@news.giganews.com...
>> As nospam said, it's tilt. You've probably seen cameras advertised as
>> PTZ,
>> referring to (horizontal) pan, (vertical) tilt, and (Z-axis) zoom.
>
> Regardless of horizontal, or vertical pan, the software used must be
> capable of addressing, via appropriate projection (cylindrical, spherical,
> etc) the focal length of the lens used, which should be constant for each
> captured frame to be stitched.
>
> Issues such as exposure, and white balance for each frame should also be
> considered, as exposure/WB settings for the first frame of the pano frame
> group are not going to be the same for the final frame. Sometimes you can
> be lucky with auto exposure, and auto White balance being good enough, but
> very often it isn’t. When it isn’t you are likely to find noticeable, and
> difficult to correct frame boundaries, and/or banding in the sky.
> A good tripod with a pan head will help deliver better results than a
> handheld pano.
>
> This was a handheld pano:
> <https://photos.smugmug.com/SA-2018/i-Z6Xm55B/0/62672f51/O/_DSF0332.jpg>
>
> These days I find a drone to be a great tool for capturing panoramas.
> <https://photos.smugmug.com/Air-2-Work/i-qx457Mp/0/f47e5f0f/O/DJI_0074.jpg>
Those two are damn good. I can't see any ghosting or discontinuities that
>> PTZ,
>> referring to (horizontal) pan, (vertical) tilt, and (Z-axis) zoom.
>
> Regardless of horizontal, or vertical pan, the software used must be
> capable of addressing, via appropriate projection (cylindrical, spherical,
> etc) the focal length of the lens used, which should be constant for each
> captured frame to be stitched.
>
> Issues such as exposure, and white balance for each frame should also be
> considered, as exposure/WB settings for the first frame of the pano frame
> group are not going to be the same for the final frame. Sometimes you can
> be lucky with auto exposure, and auto White balance being good enough, but
> very often it isn’t. When it isn’t you are likely to find noticeable, and
> difficult to correct frame boundaries, and/or banding in the sky.
> A good tripod with a pan head will help deliver better results than a
> handheld pano.
>
> This was a handheld pano:
> <https://photos.smugmug.com/SA-2018/i-Z6Xm55B/0/62672f51/O/_DSF0332.jpg>
>
> These days I find a drone to be a great tool for capturing panoramas.
> <https://photos.smugmug.com/Air-2-Work/i-qx457Mp/0/f47e5f0f/O/DJI_0074.jpg>
you get with handheld panoramas where the camera may rotate (about an axis
through the lens) between photos.
I tend to always lock the exposure, white balance and focus (*) before
taking a panorama. I rarely have a tripod with me so mine are handheld. I've
used Panavue which is moderately good and Photoshop Elements 11 which is
remarkably good. Panavue has the advantage that it allows you to define
equivalent points in overlapping photos, to help in matching photos; PSE has
no manual control - but seems to manage without.
I did a test once: one photo with a wide angle lens (28 mm equivalent) and a
rectangular grid of photos that covered the same area with a standard lens
(50 mm equivalent), and the results after joining the 50 mm ones were more
similar to the 28 mm one than I was expecting.
(*) Focus locking is important if there's a chance that a close object may
fool the autofocus in shifting from infinity for one photo.
Savageduck
Dec 11, 2020, 4:22:12 PM12/11/20
to
On Dec 11, 2020, NY wrote
(in article <rr0kq3$49j$1...@dont-email.me>):
I have a Lightroom Classic/Photoshop workflow.
The DJI Mavic Air 2 has a program feature for capturing panoramas, vertical, or horizontal, or 360º spherical (which does require some post processing). The linked drone pano above is a 180º 3x7 matrix of 21 frames all controlled by the DJI in-camera programing. This is similar to the Gigapan system <http://gigapan.com>, but all the tripod-like stability provided by the drone’s GPS fixed positioning, and the camera gimbal.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
(in article <rr0kq3$49j$1...@dont-email.me>):
>
> I did a test once: one photo with a wide angle lens (28 mm equivalent) and a
> rectangular grid of photos that covered the same area with a standard lens
> (50 mm equivalent), and the results after joining the 50 mm ones were more
> similar to the 28 mm one than I was expecting.
>
> (*) Focus locking is important if there's a chance that a close object may
> fool the autofocus in shifting from infinity for one photo.
When shooting multi-frame panoramas you are better off using a “normal” lens (50-55mm for FF/ 32-35mm for APS-C) rather than a wide, or ultra-wide lens. Using a WA lens can lead to bad distortions which software will have a tough time handling.
> I did a test once: one photo with a wide angle lens (28 mm equivalent) and a
> rectangular grid of photos that covered the same area with a standard lens
> (50 mm equivalent), and the results after joining the 50 mm ones were more
> similar to the 28 mm one than I was expecting.
>
> (*) Focus locking is important if there's a chance that a close object may
> fool the autofocus in shifting from infinity for one photo.
The DJI Mavic Air 2 has a program feature for capturing panoramas, vertical, or horizontal, or 360º spherical (which does require some post processing). The linked drone pano above is a 180º 3x7 matrix of 21 frames all controlled by the DJI in-camera programing. This is similar to the Gigapan system <http://gigapan.com>, but all the tripod-like stability provided by the drone’s GPS fixed positioning, and the camera gimbal.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Java Jive
Dec 11, 2020, 4:54:48 PM12/11/20
to
On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 22:27:44 -0500, Paul <nos...@needed.invalid>
wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
> >
wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
> >
> > Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
> > Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> > enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> > almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> > accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> > lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> > them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
> >
> > www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
>
> > Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> > enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> > almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> > accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> > lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> > them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
> >
> > www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stitching
>
> "Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
> Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
Panorama Tools is the engine used in Hugin and PtGUI, the latter of
>
> "Dedicated programs include Autostitch, Hugin, Ptgui, Panorama Tools,
> Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and CleVR Stitcher.
which is commercial costing significant money, so no point in looking
there.
CleVR Stitcher appears to be web-based and for all I know will keep
the finish result to use as they will (their FAQs don't say
different), so I think I'll give that a miss as well.
Around 2012 I bought a Samsung S2 (I think, model GT-N7100) smartphone
with a camera with panoramic stitching built-in. This died a year or
two back, but AFAICR one set panorama mode, touched the shutter
control at one end of the intended view, slowly scanned across to the
other end, and then touched the shutter control again to end.
Soon after beginning to use this for some breathtaking views in
Scotland, I was gutted to find that when one zoomed into the results,
nearly all them had at least one faulty join, and the longer the
panorama, the more likely this was to happen, and the greater the
number of them. So I started taking each one ten times in the hope
that at least one would turn out good, but mostly they just were
broken in identical places. However, I've been looking through these
over the last couple of days, and I think some of them might have
enough variation in the placement of the errors to be able to stitch a
complete panorama and so realise something of my original vision.
Bloody fag though.
I may post some of the results as above, but don't hold your breath,
because I may be gone some time!
Thanks to all for the advice.
Java Jive
Dec 20, 2020, 8:05:27 AM12/20/20
to
On Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:51:04 +0000, Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
> As you can see, I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
> the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
> in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
> constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
> to make these joins much less obvious.
>
> I'm using Hugin Panorama Creator on a Linux machine to actually do the
> stitching, but to manipulate individual photos, in principle at least,
> I could use either the Linux or Windows software that I have
> installed, which is as follows, but note that I'm most familiar with
> Paint Shop Pro v8, so minimal instructions will probably enough to
> guide me for that, but for any other software I would probably need
> more complete instructions to help me.
>
> Linux: GIMP
> Windows 7: IrfanView
> Paint
> Paint Shop Pro 8
As previously posted, I've been experimenting with other programs, of
which more anon, but the only way I could solve this particular
problem was by Hugin, using the 'expert' interface as follows (this
from memory, because that PC is booted into Windows currently, so I
can't check the exactitude of these instructions, but hopefully they
will be near enough to help others with a similar problem):
1) Choose:
Interface, Expert
Exposure
Click on Ev, Er, Eg for each component photo
Click Optimise
Interface Basic (or whatever the simple option is called)
Then stitch the panorama as you normally would
The resulting traces of joins were slight enough that they could be
removed with some work in Paint Shop Pro.
Here is the result ...
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(full).png
... and this is the central part with greater height, so you can see
the hydro dam and reservoir which weren't included in the above ...
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(partial).png
Back in 2012 when I was going to be between houses for a while, I
finally decided to invest in my first smart phone, a Samsung Galaxy
Note 2 (model GT-N7100). I was pleasantly surprised how reasonably
good the camera was, and when I first returned to the land of my
ancestors, took a great many pictures with it, including many
panoramas.
For those of you who may be unfamiliar with how this works on such a
device (increasingly few I would imagine), you choose Panorama from
the camera options, then line up the picture for the starting shot,
touch the shutter icon, gradually sweep the phone across the intended
view, whereupon it takes the photos automatically as you sweep, and
then touch the shutter again to finish.
It was not until I had access to my laptop again, that I realised that
a great many of these panoramas had failed to stitch properly.
Although the results looked alright when viewed on the phone screen,
if you zoomed in there were rather obvious bad joins in many of them,
particularly, most of the widest ones I'd done. The phone seemed
capable of taking a panorama two or three normal photos wide, but
wider than that rarely stitched cleanly. Consequently, I tried taking
the same panorama many times over, in the hope that at least one would
work, but usually it turned out that if one failed, they all would,
and usually in the same place. So I tried changing the starting
points of the different attempts in the hope that 'difficult' areas
for the phone's software would not occur at a join, but this rarely
made much difference. It was all very frustrating.
Finally that phone died, so now I have to use my tablet, a Samsung
SM-T719, as my phone - I'd been prescient enough to buy one with
mobile functionality, not just wifi - and I'm pleased to report that
this takes much better panoramas. In fact, I wish I'd had it all
those years ago on top of Ben Cruachan. Just think, all that photo
gear replaced by a device that you can fit into the map pocket of your
outdoor jacket, and, as below, does as good or better a job!
Meanwhile, I've been trying to use the software suggested by others
here to try and fix the broken panoramas of the smart phone, but with
only partial success, most of the ones I'd like most to fix are too
difficult, but here are some examples of all the above that one way or
another have come good ...
Individual photos stitched into a panorama by Autostitch (it was
actually taken from the road a little north of Applecross, but that
would have made for too unwieldy a title):
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121019_124544_Panorama_Of_Skye_From_Applecross.jpg
Two of the few wide ones on the smartphone that worked (the first is
in almost the exact opposite direction to the one above):
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121023_112355_Panorama_Over_Raasay_To_Mainland_From_Skye.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20130109_161157_Dusk_Panorama_Over_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_From_Viewpoint.jpg
A couple of the sort of narrower ones that had a greater chance of
working on the smartphone:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121118_125444_Panorama_Of_Rain_Squall_Over_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_From_Viewpoint.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121123_155906_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Kyleakin_&_Skye_Bridge_From_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_Viewpoint.jpg
A couple of sunsets successfully stitched by ICE from individual shots
taken by the smartphone:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20131209_154759_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20171027_180502_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
A couple of sunsets taken by the tablet. They've stitched fine, but
the shots have a blue-ish cast, not good for sunsets:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20180928_190530_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200119_162409_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
However the tablet is fine for taking wide rural panoramas in normal
lighting conditions:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_143022_Southerly_Panorama_Down_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_143112_Panorama_Across_Loch_Shin_From_The_Track.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_144640_NW_Panorama_Across_Loch_Shin_From_The_Track.jpg
wrote:
>
> Apologies for the cross-posting - this is a post about a problem
> that might be solved either using Linux or Windows software, I have
> both available as below.
>
> Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
> Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
(now removed)
> Apologies for the cross-posting - this is a post about a problem
> that might be solved either using Linux or Windows software, I have
> both available as below.
>
> Longer ago than I care to admit to remembering, I hiked up Ben
> Cruachan in Scotland laden with photographic gear and took photos
> enough to make up two panoramas, one of about 180 and the other of
> almost 360 degrees. However, for the 360, I suspect I must
> accidentally have nudged the zoom setting on the lens because I've
> lost some of the top & bottom off some of the images when combining
> them, but, BTAIM, here is the current state of work on it:
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Scotland_Ben_Cruachan_Panorama_2.png
> As you can see, I also didn't think to use the same exposure for all
> the photos, but merely went by the cameras internal meter, resulting
> in obvious joins. Now I'm wondering whether I could try to alter the
> constituent photos digitally to bring them all to the same 'exposure'
> to make these joins much less obvious.
>
> I'm using Hugin Panorama Creator on a Linux machine to actually do the
> stitching, but to manipulate individual photos, in principle at least,
> I could use either the Linux or Windows software that I have
> installed, which is as follows, but note that I'm most familiar with
> Paint Shop Pro v8, so minimal instructions will probably enough to
> guide me for that, but for any other software I would probably need
> more complete instructions to help me.
>
> Linux: GIMP
> Windows 7: IrfanView
> Paint
> Paint Shop Pro 8
which more anon, but the only way I could solve this particular
problem was by Hugin, using the 'expert' interface as follows (this
from memory, because that PC is booted into Windows currently, so I
can't check the exactitude of these instructions, but hopefully they
will be near enough to help others with a similar problem):
1) Choose:
Interface, Expert
Exposure
Click on Ev, Er, Eg for each component photo
Click Optimise
Interface Basic (or whatever the simple option is called)
Then stitch the panorama as you normally would
The resulting traces of joins were slight enough that they could be
removed with some work in Paint Shop Pro.
Here is the result ...
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(full).png
... and this is the central part with greater height, so you can see
the hydro dam and reservoir which weren't included in the above ...
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(partial).png
Back in 2012 when I was going to be between houses for a while, I
finally decided to invest in my first smart phone, a Samsung Galaxy
Note 2 (model GT-N7100). I was pleasantly surprised how reasonably
good the camera was, and when I first returned to the land of my
ancestors, took a great many pictures with it, including many
panoramas.
For those of you who may be unfamiliar with how this works on such a
device (increasingly few I would imagine), you choose Panorama from
the camera options, then line up the picture for the starting shot,
touch the shutter icon, gradually sweep the phone across the intended
view, whereupon it takes the photos automatically as you sweep, and
then touch the shutter again to finish.
It was not until I had access to my laptop again, that I realised that
a great many of these panoramas had failed to stitch properly.
Although the results looked alright when viewed on the phone screen,
if you zoomed in there were rather obvious bad joins in many of them,
particularly, most of the widest ones I'd done. The phone seemed
capable of taking a panorama two or three normal photos wide, but
wider than that rarely stitched cleanly. Consequently, I tried taking
the same panorama many times over, in the hope that at least one would
work, but usually it turned out that if one failed, they all would,
and usually in the same place. So I tried changing the starting
points of the different attempts in the hope that 'difficult' areas
for the phone's software would not occur at a join, but this rarely
made much difference. It was all very frustrating.
Finally that phone died, so now I have to use my tablet, a Samsung
SM-T719, as my phone - I'd been prescient enough to buy one with
mobile functionality, not just wifi - and I'm pleased to report that
this takes much better panoramas. In fact, I wish I'd had it all
those years ago on top of Ben Cruachan. Just think, all that photo
gear replaced by a device that you can fit into the map pocket of your
outdoor jacket, and, as below, does as good or better a job!
Meanwhile, I've been trying to use the software suggested by others
here to try and fix the broken panoramas of the smart phone, but with
only partial success, most of the ones I'd like most to fix are too
difficult, but here are some examples of all the above that one way or
another have come good ...
Individual photos stitched into a panorama by Autostitch (it was
actually taken from the road a little north of Applecross, but that
would have made for too unwieldy a title):
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121019_124544_Panorama_Of_Skye_From_Applecross.jpg
Two of the few wide ones on the smartphone that worked (the first is
in almost the exact opposite direction to the one above):
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121023_112355_Panorama_Over_Raasay_To_Mainland_From_Skye.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20130109_161157_Dusk_Panorama_Over_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_From_Viewpoint.jpg
A couple of the sort of narrower ones that had a greater chance of
working on the smartphone:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121118_125444_Panorama_Of_Rain_Squall_Over_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_From_Viewpoint.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20121123_155906_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Kyleakin_&_Skye_Bridge_From_Kyle_Of_Lochalsh_Viewpoint.jpg
A couple of sunsets successfully stitched by ICE from individual shots
taken by the smartphone:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20131209_154759_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20171027_180502_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
A couple of sunsets taken by the tablet. They've stitched fine, but
the shots have a blue-ish cast, not good for sunsets:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20180928_190530_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200119_162409_Sunset_Panorama_Over_Achnairn_&_Loch_Shin.jpg
However the tablet is fine for taking wide rural panoramas in normal
lighting conditions:
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_143022_Southerly_Panorama_Down_Loch_Shin.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_143112_Panorama_Across_Loch_Shin_From_The_Track.jpg
www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/20200419_144640_NW_Panorama_Across_Loch_Shin_From_The_Track.jpg
NY
Dec 20, 2020, 12:58:22 PM12/20/20
to
"Java Jive" <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:vufutflgqtcvmk150...@4ax.com...
job. It was only when I zoomed in that I could see a couple faint jagged
lines where software has not quite matched the exposure. I can't see any
discontinuities where the software hasn't quite got the geometry right.
It would be interesting to see the results a) for the camera adjusting the
exposure for each shot, and b) for the exposure being locked for all the
shots in the panorama.
https://i.postimg.cc/NMgKnQMW/Pan-2.jpg is an example of a panorama that I
took as part of a photography course (spot the other students in various
places taking their own panoramas!). There are four rows each of between
three and five landscape-format photos, at 46 mm (35 mm equivalent) on a
tripod with the exposure and focus locked. They were joined with Photoshop
Elements 11, and as far as I remember I didn't have to do any tweaking to
get them to line up. There's a fair amount of fish eye distortion (the
vertical concrete pillars are badly bowed) but there may be a warping
setting in PSE which minimises that - maybe I should have used spherical
rather than cylindrical projection, or vice versa. I've left it uncropped to
show where the rows started and ended.
https://i.postimg.cc/vH6STy8R/STA-0258-STG-0264-PSE-Cyl.png is a more
conventional photo, made up of a single row of 8 portrait-format photos,
again with locked focus, zoom and exposure. The camera was hand-held for
this, so there's the possibility of PSE having to rotate photos slightly to
line them up; there's also no guarantee that all the photos were taken from
an identical location, as I turned my body (and maybe moved my feet) to take
the various photos.
news:vufutflgqtcvmk150...@4ax.com...
> The resulting traces of joins were slight enough that they could be
> removed with some work in Paint Shop Pro.
>
> Here is the result ...
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(full).png
> ... and this is the central part with greater height, so you can see
> the hydro dam and reservoir which weren't included in the above ...
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(partial).png
I think Hugin and PSP (with input from you!) have done a pretty damn good
> removed with some work in Paint Shop Pro.
>
> Here is the result ...
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(full).png
> ... and this is the central part with greater height, so you can see
> the hydro dam and reservoir which weren't included in the above ...
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(partial).png
job. It was only when I zoomed in that I could see a couple faint jagged
lines where software has not quite matched the exposure. I can't see any
discontinuities where the software hasn't quite got the geometry right.
It would be interesting to see the results a) for the camera adjusting the
exposure for each shot, and b) for the exposure being locked for all the
shots in the panorama.
https://i.postimg.cc/NMgKnQMW/Pan-2.jpg is an example of a panorama that I
took as part of a photography course (spot the other students in various
places taking their own panoramas!). There are four rows each of between
three and five landscape-format photos, at 46 mm (35 mm equivalent) on a
tripod with the exposure and focus locked. They were joined with Photoshop
Elements 11, and as far as I remember I didn't have to do any tweaking to
get them to line up. There's a fair amount of fish eye distortion (the
vertical concrete pillars are badly bowed) but there may be a warping
setting in PSE which minimises that - maybe I should have used spherical
rather than cylindrical projection, or vice versa. I've left it uncropped to
show where the rows started and ended.
https://i.postimg.cc/vH6STy8R/STA-0258-STG-0264-PSE-Cyl.png is a more
conventional photo, made up of a single row of 8 portrait-format photos,
again with locked focus, zoom and exposure. The camera was hand-held for
this, so there's the possibility of PSE having to rotate photos slightly to
line them up; there's also no guarantee that all the photos were taken from
an identical location, as I turned my body (and maybe moved my feet) to take
the various photos.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
Dec 20, 2020, 6:48:56 PM12/20/20
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 17:57:20, NY <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote (my
Yes, pretty dam.
(Sorry. I'll get my coat ...)
being asked if he was tired of being described as impeachable), on Desert
Island Discs, 2012-1-29.
responses usually follow points raised):
>"Java Jive" <ja...@evij.com.invalid> wrote in message
>news:vufutflgqtcvmk150...@4ax.com...
[]
>news:vufutflgqtcvmk150...@4ax.com...
>> the hydro dam and reservoir which weren't included in the above ...
>>
>>www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(
>>partial).png
>
>I think Hugin and PSP (with input from you!) have done a pretty damn
[]
>>
>>www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/197709_-_Ben_Cruachan_-_Panorama_From_The_Summit_(
>>partial).png
>
>I think Hugin and PSP (with input from you!) have done a pretty damn
Yes, pretty dam.
(Sorry. I'll get my coat ...)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
"I'm very peachable, if people know how to peach" - Sir David Attenborough (on
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
being asked if he was tired of being described as impeachable), on Desert
Island Discs, 2012-1-29.
Melanie van Buren
Dec 31, 2020, 1:29:43 PM12/31/20
to
On 11/12/2020 21:22, Savageduck wrote:
> When shooting multi-frame panoramas you are better off using a “normal” lens (50-55mm for FF/ 32-35mm for APS-C) rather than a wide, or ultra-wide lens. Using a WA lens can lead to bad distortions which software will have a tough time handling.
Out of curiosity would lens correction (possibly with cropping if
> When shooting multi-frame panoramas you are better off using a “normal” lens (50-55mm for FF/ 32-35mm for APS-C) rather than a wide, or ultra-wide lens. Using a WA lens can lead to bad distortions which software will have a tough time handling.
extreme) work well with panoramic software?
--
Melanie van Buren
Andy Burns
Dec 31, 2020, 1:40:45 PM12/31/20
to
Melanie van Buren wrote:
> Out of curiosity would lens correction (possibly with cropping if
> extreme) work well with panoramic software?
Doesn't Hugin already have a lens database used for correction?
> Out of curiosity would lens correction (possibly with cropping if
> extreme) work well with panoramic software?
I always think I've taken enough photos when doing panoramas, then find
out later I could do with 2x or 3x the number. Easier now using a
mobile as it guides you in realtime.
Melanie van Buren
Dec 31, 2020, 3:39:42 PM12/31/20
to
even remember the name of what software I had. I had also forgotten
until you mentioned it working out the number of angles you needed to
take a good panorama. Do smartphones now do this for you?
Super huge resolution pictures using composites is kind of similar too.
One thing I read about today is Olympus cameras using jitter of the
optical stablisation to achieve a better resolution and colour fidelity.
I have no idea whether it did much in practice but it made me wonder
whether spy satellites use similar techniques or maybe overlaying
separate shorter wavelengths on normal images to enhance visual fidelity.
Going off on a wilder tangent I have completely forgotten the name for
the technique where you paint different semi random colours over a
picture using luminance to create a clear picture which doesn't look
like random splotches of colour in practice. I know you can do this with
oil paints but also replicate this in Photoshop with a photograph. I
just can't think of the name for the technique.
Sorry. My mind wandered a bit.
--
Melanie van Buren
Andy Burns
Dec 31, 2020, 4:01:40 PM12/31/20
to
Melanie van Buren wrote:
> I haven't touched panorama software for so long I can't
> even remember the name of what software I had. I had also forgotten
> until you mentioned it working out the number of angles you needed to
> take a good panorama.
I did buy one of those pano-heads with detents every 30/40 degrees, but
> I haven't touched panorama software for so long I can't
> even remember the name of what software I had. I had also forgotten
> until you mentioned it working out the number of angles you needed to
> take a good panorama.
I think I need a replacement set of rings to go with the lenses I have.
> Do smartphones now do this for you?
around to cover the entire scene, then after it's uploaded to the cloud
their servers stitch it for you.
> Super huge resolution pictures using composites is kind of similar too.
>
> One thing I read about today is Olympus cameras using jitter of the
> optical stablisation to achieve a better resolution and colour fidelity.
call it.
> I have no idea whether it did much in practice but it made me wonder
> whether spy satellites use similar techniques or maybe overlaying
> separate shorter wavelengths on normal images to enhance visual fidelity.
>
> Going off on a wilder tangent I have completely forgotten the name for
> the technique where you paint different semi random colours over a
> picture using luminance to create a clear picture which doesn't look
> like random splotches of colour in practice. I know you can do this with
> oil paints but also replicate this in Photoshop with a photograph. I
> just can't think of the name for the technique.
Melanie van Buren
Dec 31, 2020, 4:26:30 PM12/31/20
to
Good guess but pointalism is just dots. Flipping clever though and
really interesting to see how close up it looks like a total mess. I had
to do a reverse image search of a picture I had downloaded ages ago to
remind myself of an artist famous for the technique I was thinking of.
I've watched a Youtube of Françoise Nielly doing her paintings and she
paints them very fast without a lookup table. I found a good Youtube on
how to convert a photograph using masking and the luminance channel to
create this effect and for the life of me can't find anything like this now.
https://store.francoise-nielly.com/en/
http://www.cruzine.com/2010/11/30/color-fusion-francoise-nielly/
There's an OTT tutorial for oil painting. It's okay but I'm not sure
they have got it quite right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aptq9V2m8t8
Spontaneous Realism Painting by Art Voka is pretty interesting too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYUBbzah-o8
Getting back onto the topic of photography although still off topic for
this thread this last video made me thing the art is like a direct form
of "pre-visualation" whereas photography, which struggled for years to
finally be considered fine art" is a slightly different process but to
similar ends.
--
Melanie van Buren
Gordon Freeman
Jan 11, 2021, 12:57:10 AM1/11/21
to
Melanie van Buren <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 31/12/2020 18:40, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Melanie van Buren wrote:
>>
>> I always think I've taken enough photos when doing panoramas, then find
>> out later I could do with 2x or 3x the number. Easier now using a
>> mobile as it guides you in realtime.
>
> I don't know. I haven't touched panorama software for so long I can't
> even remember the name of what software I had. I had also forgotten
> until you mentioned it working out the number of angles you needed to
> take a good panorama. Do smartphones now do this for you?
My Panasonic GM5 camera takes the shots itself, you just click the shutter
> On 31/12/2020 18:40, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Melanie van Buren wrote:
>>
>> I always think I've taken enough photos when doing panoramas, then find
>> out later I could do with 2x or 3x the number. Easier now using a
>> mobile as it guides you in realtime.
>
> I don't know. I haven't touched panorama software for so long I can't
> even remember the name of what software I had. I had also forgotten
> until you mentioned it working out the number of angles you needed to
> take a good panorama. Do smartphones now do this for you?
to start then pan slowly in the chosen direction then click again to
finish. It takes whatever photos it needs and stitches them together in
camera. The downside though is they only have half the vertical resolution
that the sensor is capable of for some reason, I guess doing it full
resolution would make the final panorama too big for the camera to handle.
0 new messages