Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Harold Clark on October 05, 2010, 07:24:04 am
-
I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print. I have often stitched a few frames from my Canons ( 16 & 21MP ) but nothing near the number that would be required for this amount of resolution. Any advice from the multi frame stitchers out there? I could also shoot 8x10 film. I don't have any MF digital equipment.
-
Aha.
You need Yair's whizzy new back.
J
-
I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print.
Hi Harold,
What's the angle of view you need to cover? How high is the print going to be? What kind of output/presentation is it going to be (LF Inkjet / Lambda / back illumination)? What kind of detail is required, IOW what's the viewing distance?
Cheers,
Bart
-
Seitz Roundshot (160 MP) was made for this.
http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d925/f934.cfm
-
I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print. I have often stitched a few frames from my Canons ( 16 & 21MP ) but nothing near the number that would be required for this amount of resolution. Any advice from the multi frame stitchers out there? I could also shoot 8x10 film. I don't have any MF digital equipment.
Stitching can handle this without any problem.
I have many 2 meters wide shots that scream with detail and could be printed twice larger without any significant quality loss, even with your eye one inch away from the print.
You need to get to about 35.000 or 40.000 mega pixels width which will require about 15 images in vertical orientation. I recommend shooting at ISO 400 and large enough aperture (f5.6) or so if your camera allows it to shorten the exposure time so as to avoid too much sky darkening over the time of exposure from side to side.
cheers,
Bernard
-
This spring I had a job to make an image that was going to be printed 8'x12' at 150 dpi. Even with my P65+ it took 14 panels to create the final image. I used two rows with the back in vertical orientation, shifting up and down on the camera for vertical displacement and then panning every 10 degrees or so for the horizontal movement.
Looking back, I think I'd prefer to drum scan neg than try to stitch that many images again.
A little more info on my experience... (http://christopherbarrett.net/blog/?p=1468)
Cheers,
CB
-
Looking back, I think I'd prefer to drum scan neg than try to stitch that many images again.
I wouldn't. A good drumscan is rare to be found. When done well, the stitch will be of higher quality, and the computer doesn't require handholding while it's calculating (let it calculate when you sleep). That does presume one has some experience with stitching, and the subject lends itself to that approach, and the right precautions were taken.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I'd go with the 8 x 10 and drum scan by west coast imaging, properly done i think it would be better than a stitch from a dslr, too many panels required for a true dusk shot and you only have a few minutes of "Magic Time" . I stitch on a daily basis, and yes it would produce a fantastic image - I just think if you already have an 8 x 10 and know how to use it it is far better for this particular job. just My opinion ;D
-
Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.
Sample from the Seitz site:
(http://www.roundshot.ch/pictures/Westminster.jpg)
-
I do agree that the Seitz would be a really cool choice, IF you can rent one. (TY for that info Graham - I had never seen one before). OP said he already had an 8 x 10 and Canon DSLR'S ...I was just thinking between the two I would shoot film in this case.
-
I havent heard of anyone renting the seitz in the US. If anyone does, please let me know.
-
I havent heard of anyone renting the seitz in the US. If anyone does, please let me know.
I would ask Fotocare in NYC 212.741.2990 Donald or Fred
I've seen Seitz cameras there at times.
-
This spring I had a job to make an image that was going to be printed 8'x12' at 150 dpi. Even with my P65+ it took 14 panels to create the final image. I used two rows with the back in vertical orientation, shifting up and down on the camera for vertical displacement and then panning every 10 degrees or so for the horizontal movement.
CB
I would have thought that 14 * 65Mpx would have been a reasonable minimum - I would have gone for 180 original camera pixels per print inch for an Epson printer.
Pan-and-stitch is not Ideal for architecture... but with digital lenses you would not have the image circle to shift-and-stitch that many images, and if you used LF lenses you might need to quadruple the sensor area due to the lower res of the lens, so CB's pan-and-shift was a good compromise.
¿Where are you?
Another option is the virtual viewpoint technique/theory, which involves photographing the building/bridge/subject in sections (moving the camera between shots (or columns of shots)), but using shift to get the parallax right, as if the photo was taken from one point (the virtual viewpoint). This would be difficult if all the pictures had to be taken within a few minutes.
¿15 65Mpx cameras? ( I have thought that, to photograph a train. it would be nice to use the virtual viewpoint technique with 3 Sinars.)
-
Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.
Has the Seitz image quality been improved? The 100% samples we were shown one year ago were poor in terms of noise.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Seems perfectly acceptable to me
http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d925/f1002.cfm
-
shoot the 8x10 on 160nc, or E100G. you'll have detail coming out your ears :)
forget west coast imaging, send the film to Lenny eiger.
http://www.eigerphoto.com/pricing_policy_ep.php
he's the man when it comes to doing drum scans RIGHT!
not cheap, but that's when you build the cost of scans into the budget from the get-go.
-Dan
-
I second the vote for Lenny Eiger. He does superb work.
-
Another option is the virtual viewpoint technique/theory, which involves photographing the building/bridge/subject in sections (moving the camera between shots (or columns of shots)), but using shift to get the parallax right, as if the photo was taken from one point (the virtual viewpoint). This would be difficult if all the pictures had to be taken within a few minutes.
¿15 65Mpx cameras? ( I have thought that, to photograph a train. it would be nice to use the virtual viewpoint technique with 3 Sinars.)
Dear Dick,
I have lost counts on how many times you have sugested the "vitual viewpoint technique" as an valid solution to a tecnical challenge. Could you please go out and try the theory in real life before you surgest it next time to someone in here - please try it with a 3d object, like a brigde or a building, not a flat wall.
I can tell you from experience through my daily work, that if you move the lens, you will cretate a new perpective of the object, so you will end up with a series of images, each with there own unique perspective. No amount of shift is going to change that.....
/adam
-
Dear Dick,
I have lost counts on how many times you have sugested the "vitual viewpoint technique" as an valid solution to a tecnical challenge. Could you please go out and try the theory in real life before you surgest it next time to someone in here - please try it with a 3d object, like a brigde or a building, not a flat wall.
I can tell you from experience through my daily work, that if you move the lens, you will cretate a new perpective of the object, so you will end up with a series of images, each with there own unique perspective. No amount of shift is going to change that.....
/adam
I am waiting for a sliding back I bought on eBay, and this should enable me to do this (my Silvestri back is not worth using, as it does not focus, and the digiback falls out).
Viewpoint is perspective, they say, so if a series of photos has the same (virtual) viewpoint, they should all have similar perspective... but where you want to join the pictures the perspective/parallax would be different.
The way round the perspective problem is to join the pictures in flat areas of the subject... this would be very easy to do on a typical building with rows of windows, and, as you suggest, the technique would not work for complex 3D scenes where you could not join pictures on flat surfaces.
... and old buildings with inset windows, bay windows, porches etc. are not totally flat.
... many stone arch bridges would also be easy, as the pictures can be joined between the arches.
I appreciate that the technique would not work for a typical landscape... but I want to take pictures or harbours, and at Swanage and Port Isaac there are roads on which I could join the pictures ( I am thinking of using pan-and-stitch for some sections of the pictures, and shift-and -stitch and/or virtual viewpoint for others).
Most rural stone brides would be relatively easy, as they have flat areas between the arches.
The "real world" Seitz sample picture in this topic would be difficult or impossible...
You would have to be in the river to take the pictures
There are not large flat areas between the arches
The building in the background (The UK Houses of Parliament, or Palace of Westminster) would be at a larger scale than in a picture taken from the virtual viewpoint, so a simple join between the arches of the bridge would mean that you would loose some bits of the building, or do a complicated stitch, re-scale and re-combine operation which might work, but would be a PITA.
There is nothing miraculous about the technique, and it may well not be suitable or possible for the bridge project that is the subject of this topic (access tends to be a problem for bridges)... but, for a typical wide building in a narrow street I think it would work.
-
The way round the perspective problem is to join the pictures in flat areas of the subject... this would be very easy to do on a typical building with rows of windows, and, as you suggest, the technique would not work for complex 3D scenes where you could not join pictures on flat surfaces.
when you try your technique for real, I think you will discover that the real world is a complex 3D scene.... maybe the stone bridge looks flat, but I can tell you, that the for- and back ground is not flat, what you see between the arches have perspective for sure - and a even flat looking building in a narrow street is part of a complex 3D scene, like it or not - give it a try, looking forward to see the result ;)
-
Gidday,
This is a shot which was turned into a 25 metre billboard in Auckland taken with a Nikon D3X cropped.
Cheers
Simon
-
Apologies in advance if this upsets anyone but if you shoot on single or even pairs of sheets of 8" x 10" rather than large numbers of stitched frames it is likely you will take a better picture. When shooting a single frame one can shoot at the decisive moment, (yes, even with supposedly 'static' subjects). The decisive moment properly encompasses also sorts of nice chance stuff, it is not a question of compositing a large number of elements into an attractive arrangement.
Your composition with one or two frames is also likely to be superior. In my own experience, and from looking at the work of others, stitching mostly tends to yield rather dull and obvious compositions.
Both of these issues are greatly compounded by stitching with a very large numbers of frames.
However, in large measure the appropriate technique for you should reflect your present area of greatest expertise. Neither 8" x 10" nor large-scale stitching come easy.
Others have recommended scanners. I vote for these guys. They did great work scanning 5" x 4" Portra NC for a campaign I shot in NY this summer.
http://www.drumscanning.com/about.html (http://www.drumscanning.com/about.html)
-
I do agree that the Seitz would be a really cool choice, IF you can rent one. (TY for that info Graham - I had never seen one before). OP said he already had an 8 x 10 and Canon DSLR'S ...I was just thinking between the two I would shoot film in this case.
I think Teamwork still have a demo one for sale, I was nearly tempted with it some months back http://www.teamworkphoto.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=76_485
Kevin.
-
Thanks to everybody for all the helpful suggestions re this project. I am leaning towards 8x10, since I have the technology. Drum scans aren't as available as a few years ago, but there are several labs available in the Toronto area, where I am located.
The multi image digital stitch is interesting, but I don't have experience with that yet although I plan to practice
this method for the future. After discussing this further with the client re technical requirements, I will make a final decision. I was visiting a friend last evening who had a10 ft print from a cropped 5x7 and that looked pretty good, so 5x7 may be sufficient and is more user friendly.
I will report back when finished and let everybody know how it went.
-
I do aerials and I just had a request from a client to do a shoot. I quoted my normal rate for the job as it was a sales brochure. Then out of the blue they added "we need to make a 6meter by 10 meter print will this cause any technical problems? we had one done before". I was somewhat taken aback by the request and wanted more details like how it was to be viewed etc. I shoot Canon 1DsmkIII and was thinking I would need to hire in something exotic. I asked the question of my client to ask his client could they tell me from the exif what camera was used before.
The answers came back, we need to view it up close the last one was really good and it was shot on a Eos 1DsmkIII.
I wonder when going this big how much difference something like a P45 or bigger makes, the difference in enlargement is not that great over a 35mm, I would think the advantage shows more on a 1 meter enlargement more than something where both systems are well beyond their native file size.
Anyway to be sure I will shoot with the 35mm f1.4 with the intention of stitching a few together.
Kevin.
-
A Canon dslr file doesnt compare to a P45 period, anyone who thinks it does is kidding themselves - both are outstanding but the P45 file will be better - question is do you need it ?
I also shoot aerials and I may favor the canon because if you are going to stitch FPS will matter, the less you move between frames the better and the P45 wont shoot as fast as the canon. What is the viewing distance the client expects ? That is a pretty huge print if they plan on pixel peepin ! I would use a Gyro as well, it makes a world of difference in the sharpness and number of keepers. sounds like a nice job though love to see the end result !
Regards
Dennis
-
I use a gyro when needed. Don't get me wrong I am sure a P45 is better but when going to huge sizes both will need a lot of interpolation and maybe then the difference is not as big as say a 2 meter print. I will shoot with as the 35mm f1.4 lens it's about the sharpest lens I have ever owned on any format.
The big problem with this job is it's looking South, not ideal at anytime of year but worse now.
Kevin.
-
I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print. I have often stitched a few frames from my Canons ( 16 & 21MP ) but nothing near the number that would be required for this amount of resolution. Any advice from the multi frame stitchers out there? I could also shoot 8x10 film. I don't have any MF digital equipment.
The project is finally complete. I rented a hasselblad 39MP, and with the 80mm lens did a 7 frame panorama ( camera vertical ) with lots of overlap. This resulted in a 100MP raw file. Exposure times ran 23 seconds @ f8
The print has now grown to 18 ft, I did a very quick up rez to final output size in photoshop and printed an 8x10 section. I am very pleased with how much detail is there. Thanks to everybody for their recommendations.
-
The project is finally complete. I rented a hasselblad 39MP, and with the 80mm lens did a 7 frame panorama ( camera vertical ) with lots of overlap. This resulted in a 100MP raw file. Exposure times ran 23 seconds @ f8
The print has now grown to 18 ft, I did a very quick up rez to final output size in photoshop and printed an 8x10 section. I am very pleased with how much detail is there. Thanks to everybody for their recommendations.
This is very nice, the patch on the right lower corner looks odd though.
-
Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.
Sample from the Seitz site:
(http://www.roundshot.ch/pictures/Westminster.jpg)
This is very beautiful Graham, how did you process this picture, HDR?
EDIT: I was confused and thought this was your photo.
-
This is very nice, the patch on the right lower corner looks odd though.
Good observation, this is a quick jpeg, I goofed with the clone stamp and replicated one of the rocks.
-
Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.
Sample from the Seitz site:
(http://www.roundshot.ch/pictures/Westminster.jpg)
Have Seitz still not made the 6*17 view camera back to allow correction of verticals?
I have seen better pictures of this scene.
-
Looking back, I think I'd prefer to drum scan neg than try to stitch that many images again.
Chris is quite right that if your job requires multiple rows of stitches the number of seams to match goes way up. Depending on your content, this may be a non-issue, but in many cases, it is a lot of work to get right. If you require a wide but narrow image that can be done with a single row of stitching, that becomes much more straighforward.
If you're not afraid of a little touch-up work, you also might want to look at the GigaPan. I've not used it personally, so I can't vouch for it, but I've met and talked with a two or three happy owners. http://gigapansystems.com/gigapan-epic-pro-product-page.html.
-
I have seen better pictures of this scene.
Can you post a link, I would love to see it.
-
Dick, when are we going to see some of YOUR pictures?
-
The big problem with this job is it's looking South, not ideal at anytime of year but worse now.
Kevin.
Depends on whether you're north or south of the equator, doesn't it? ;)
-
The project is finally complete. I rented a hasselblad 39MP, and with the 80mm lens did a 7 frame panorama ( camera vertical ) with lots of overlap. This resulted in a 100MP raw file. Exposure times ran 23 seconds @ f8
The print has now grown to 18 ft, I did a very quick up rez to final output size in photoshop and printed an 8x10 section. I am very pleased with how much detail is there. Thanks to everybody for their recommendations.
That came out really nice!
23 seconds is an odd number (literally and metaphorically)...just wondering, how'd you end up with that?
-
Dick, when are we going to see some of YOUR pictures?
I have already posted a picture this week, but only to demonstrate DOF.
I had my open cholecystectomy (gall bladder removal) six months ago, and I am now physically able to contemplate getting out there and taking some pictures.
This last month I have had to clear 2 houses and help organize a party for 50, and I have regretted not being able to find the time and energy to get out there and get some pictures of the autumn colours.
I now now received my H4D-60, but unfortunately it is not capable of working with flash with view cameras - I hope this will be rectified soon.
I have been accumulating Sinar kit from eBay for many years, and I am now within (hopefully) weeks of getting a Sinar digital system together, with daylight live view.
I had thought that I would buy a cheap second-hand Hasselblad back as a backup, but I am now thinking of getting a system that complements the Hasselblad.
The H4D-60 should have been able to make a good job of the bridge in single-row pan-and-stitch mode, and there would probably not have been enough image circle to do it shift and stitch with an Apo-Digitar.
There are techniques I want to use that need electronic shutters on view cameras and the Sinar eShutters should be available in a few weeks.
I want to concentrate on what you cannot do with a DSLR, but a "point-and-shoot-adapter" comes with Hasselblad H4s, so I have a DSLR...
This picture was a lens assessment shot, using my 300mm (on a demo H4D-60) at a Hasselbuddy (UK) event. I moved sideways to get cross-lighting on her cleavage, and lost the background. There was only one light available, and it was so low-powered I had to use 400 ISO for f16 for DOF (I have 4 Elinchrome 1500s). Focusing on her neck put her face slightly off the PSF, and kept the hair sharp. In a head shot I would use focus lock to soften the face, and not use the clever true-focus function.
-
I now now received my H4D-60, but unfortunately it is not capable of working with flash with view cameras - I hope this will be rectified soon.
Good that you are getting better. How complicated have been to Hasselblad the jump to Dalsa sensors. It is simply amazing /unexpected.
I hope when they release the next generation (looks like Kodak is on the high volume sensors only) the lessons learned help them smooth the ride.
-
That came out really nice!
23 seconds is an odd number (literally and metaphorically)...just wondering, how'd you end up with that?
Thanks for your comments, the Hasselblad shutter speed choices were 16 seconds, then 23 etc. I am sure you could probably change the increments in the menu, but I am not overly familiar with the system and wanted to keep it simple.