Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Landscape & Nature Photography => Topic started by: julian kalmar on October 01, 2008, 09:57:12 am
-
Well, of course it´s not important how you take your pictures. But in this case I think, it´s a little bit different.
Due to less DOF with 300mm, for each image ( except the first three rows) I had to take 2 or sometimes three images with different focusing points. Of course you can´t do this with an automatic pano head and so the session took me quite a long time. For nearly 400 images I had to adjust the focus points manually, which really needs a lot of concentration.
Because of moving leaves and shadows, I had to edit a lot of pictures manually before the stitch.
Now the image: Stitched from 349 images (made from 729 images)
http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html (http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html)
UPDATE!!!!!
I added one more row. For the images on the very right side in the last row, I had to change my cameraposition, but of course it was impossible to warp these images manually to fit in the panorama.
Now I updated my old PTGui version and tried the new "viewpointcorrection" feature.
Well, of course I had to work manually a little bit but anyhow, it was possible to add a complete row more.
The bad news: Without viewpointcorrection, PTGui worked 7 hours for the panorama but 32 hours with viewpointcorrection for 7 images.
I alsow edit a lot of little mistakes in the panorama. Especially the sky presented an unbeliavable chalange. Now, here you can compare the new and the old version.
NEW: http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna.html (http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna.html)
OLD: http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html (http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html)
-
Neat. How many meters long can you print that?
And give me a hint. There must be naked people in there somewhere.
-
That's just amazing, Julian. I don't believe I've ever seen such a detailed and large panoramic scene before that's tack sharp from near to far. The software on your site that enables one to zoom to 100% on any part of the image is also amazing.
Only one small improvement I can think of. Perhaps you should have exposure bracketed each shot. That would have given you 2187 images to work with .
-
Oh that's just sick! What did you use for the stitching app?
-
That is some fantastic work. My largest panoramic had around 80 images. It was challenging to work on. This one must have been a bear.
I have found that for me there is a point of diminishing returns somewhere around 20 images in a panoramic. At that point there is a high probability that one of a few defects might appear in one image:
- Lighting Conditions Changed, exposure affected
- lighting conditions changed, whitebalance affected
- Tripod shakes, causes blur
- Angle to sun changes, whitebalance affected or flare introduced
Because of the sizes I like to print, two rows are generally plenty of pixels and more than 12 images across becomes unweildy to work with . I have done some 24"x60" works that are really difficult to work with. Not that they aren't pretty rewarding sometimes.
Accomplishing an image with this sharpness and this size is exceptional.
Now what are you going to do with it?
-
Check out the woman walking into a restaurant in the lower left corner. You can actually read the menu items on the wall outside.
-
Oh that's just sick! What did you use for the stitching app?
Nodalninja 5 and PTGui for stitching.
-
- Lighting Conditions Changed, exposure affected
- lighting conditions changed, whitebalance affected
- Tripod shakes, causes blur
- Angle to sun changes, whitebalance affected or flare introduced
Yes all these things are the most challanges in creating Gigapixelimages.
Now all little mistakes due to stitching errors are removed ( all I saw) and the sky looks much better now.
These two things have been most difficult: Finding all little mistakes ( yes, it´s not difficult to edit the mistakes but to look for them in the final panorama) and the sky.
But now the image looks like one image and not like a combination of some 100 images.
-
....
I alsow edit a lot of little mistakes in the panorama. Especially the sky presented an unbeliavable chalange. Now, here you can compare the new and the old version.
NEW: http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna.html (http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna.html)
OLD: http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html (http://photoartkalmar.com/ZOOMIFY/Vienna%20pano.html)
Julian, this is a terrific piece of work. As someone who has only being doing panoramas for about a year - mostly HDR interior sphericals - and using PTGui, it gives me a fascinating benchmark - that I am fairly unlikely to ever attain. What software did you use for the focus blending?
Also, using the NN5 (I have an NN3) how did you determine the overlaps? by eye? I don't believe that this panhead has fine detents or even fine enough markings to measure the deflections accurately. I can see how it's relatively easy to overlap the horizontally adjacent images by eye, but not how you would remember the vertical overlap points.
Maybe you'd be kind enough to explain your shooting methodology.
You say the sky presented a big challenge. Which of the blending applications worked best? PTGui, Enblend, Smartblend? Did you generate blend planes and then flatten?
I don't think there's too much danger that by conveying this information you're liable to induce a mass of competition!
Great stuff, thanks!
Roy
-
What software did you use for the focus blending?
Also, using the NN5 (I have an NN3) how did you determine the overlaps? by eye? I don't believe that this panhead has fine detents or even fine enough markings to measure the deflections accurately. I can see how it's relatively easy to overlap the horizontally adjacent images by eye, but not how you would remember the vertical overlap points.
Maybe you'd be kind enough to explain your shooting methodology.
You say the sky presented a big challenge. Which of the blending applications worked best? PTGui, Enblend, Smartblend? Did you generate blend planes and then flatten?
I don't think there's too much danger that by conveying this information you're liable to induce a mass of competition!
Great stuff, thanks!
Roy
I`m verry sorry for the late answer:
For stitching I´m using PTGui
For focus blending CombineZM (a really phantastic freeware)
For the pano had I made two different detent rings: One with 100 stops and one with 135 stops.
The vertical position I do with hand. You don´t have to remember any position as long as you don´t move the camera.
Unfortunately there is no good tool for the skyproblem. You have to edit in PS manually.
-
I`m verry sorry for the late answer:
For stitching I´m using PTGui
For focus blending CombineZM (a really phantastic freeware)
For the pano had I made two different detent rings: One with 100 stops and one with 135 stops.
The vertical position I do with hand. You don´t have to remember any position as long as you don´t move the camera.
Unfortunately there is no good tool for the skyproblem. You have to edit in PS manually.
hello julian,
really nice ,
which camera did you use ?
best regards
-
which camera did you use ?
Eos 5d and 300mm f4
-
Nice work, I don't think it is the world largest but who cares...
http://www.yosemite-17-gigapixels.com/ (http://www.yosemite-17-gigapixels.com/)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Nice work, I don't think it is the world largest but who cares...
http://www.yosemite-17-gigapixels.com/ (http://www.yosemite-17-gigapixels.com/)
Cheers,
Bernard
Yosemite 17 gigapixel is a phantastic image but they didn´t use focusblending, that´s why the foreground isn´t sharp.
I used focus blending to achieve a completly sharp image and as far as I know, I´m the only one how is using this technique in such big images