Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: dreed on March 22, 2021, 06:38:25 am
-
Compared to earlier releases of LR that I'd tried, the LR panorama merge is a much better proposition.
In some instances I now prefer it to PTgui because it gets colours better.
However...
All too often I see "tears" or "seams" in LR panorama merge output that PTgui does not have. Some examples of an obvious merge tear attached where it is failing to align the horizon and map the merge correctly.
-
Yes happens a quite often with images that have a subject like yours. Tearing is a good name for it.
Ptgui usually won’t get these like you said but I still often prefer LR as it has the ability to warp the edges without detail loss. If original would do that I would stay with it.
What I often do in situations like yours is to copy a part of one of the original image sand paste it on to the tear then warp that selection to meet the pano as odds are they won’t align. The use curves or other adjustments to blend the exposure to the pano as again odds are they won’t be the same.
Paul C
-
With a subject that changes its shape between shots you never have a perfect stitch, no matter what program you use.
-
With a subject that changes its shape between shots you never have a perfect stitch, no matter what program you use.
If other programs can get the stitching right for obvious features like this, why can't LR?
-
If other programs can get the stitching right for obvious features like this, why can't LR?
LR can. I have made panoramas of Lake Erie without difficulty. When issues have arisen I have sometimes had success just rerunning the pano. I have no idea but rerunning has fixed most of the problems I encountered. The other major problem is inadequate overlap. Panos that have failed for me have less than 10% overlap.
-
I have found that with sufficient overlap of frames I've eliminated 99% of this issue - to the point that I don't think much about it anymore.
Rand
-
If other programs can get the stitching right for obvious features like this, why can't LR?
How did PTGUI deal with the section you showed, or did it find a different area to merge that was problem free?
-
I've had just that sort of problem with horizons in seascapes, even with close to 50% overlaps. It seems to be more of an issue with very large panos, let's say 10 farms or so. The only thing that helps—not always though—is tripod mounting.
-
I've had just that sort of problem with horizons in seascapes, even with close to 50% overlaps. It seems to be more of an issue with very large panos, let's say 10 farms or so. The only thing that helps—not always though—is tripod mounting.
This is exactly my experience but I see it with smaller pano's of 2 or 3 frames.
Good to know that I'm not alone :)
-
The latest Lightroom 10.3 does not improve on this situation at all.
Using the latest Affinity Photo (1.94 beta) is more interesting. Sometimes AP fails where LR does not, sometimes it gets the colour blending wrong rather than a tear, sometimes both fail but there are also a good number of times when Affinity Photo gets it right when LR does not.
AP does not provide any option to do post processing on the stitched image when doing the stitch whereas LR has an option to "apply settings" (i.e make the picture look pretty if you've turned down saturation, etc, in camera.)
If you've had trouble with LR stitching panoramas, give the latest Affinity Photo a spin.
-
I'm not doing panos often latelty, but I can't remember the last time LR failed for me as in your photo.
Water can be tricky, in your example image it looks like LR aligned streaking in the water below the horizon, instead of the horizon itself.
Just thinking out loud (not looking for answers):
Stitching RAW or jpeg? Maybe lens corrections baked into jpeg files are messing with stitching?
What lens(es) are you using? Wide angle lenses can be more difficult to warp before stitching. Does this happen with multiple lenses or just one lens? Does it fail with OEM lenses or more with third party lenses? Different lenses suffer different types and amounts of distortion.
If a zoom, is it possible the focal length was bumped between shots?
If handheld, how good is the initial alignment of the images?
Definition of overlap - 100% to me means edge of previous frame placed in center of new frame (every part of the image is covered by at least two shots except the first and last). Some say it is overkill but it also means less image is wasted when cropping.
-
Water can be tricky, in your example image it looks like LR aligned streaking in the water below the horizon, instead of the horizon itself.
Very. It seems that water is the achilles heel of panorama stitching.
Stitching RAW or jpeg? Maybe lens corrections baked into jpeg files are messing with stitching?
All raw. The shots being merged are from 3 cameras, see: https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=128871.0
On the one hand, it should be easy - cameras aren't moving, share the same horizontal plane - but on the other, there's the chance for small differences in time between each shutter being activated and in which case, I wouldn't expect to see merge issues with the horizon, but merge issues at the beach. In some shots, that does happen - the horizon is right but the beach is not due to time differential - but the ones that leave me dumbstruck are those where the beach is right but the horizon has a tear.
-
Water ripples, waves, white “streaming” etc., that isn’t in the same place in each part of an overlapped frame - and therefore doesn’t stitch well - can hardly be blamed on the stitching software. Layer blending in PS for those parts of the image would be better to “patch” the bad areas.
In general, water notwithstanding, I’d say that making sure the pan head is dead level, and that camera/lens position has been adjusted to eliminate parallax, is important for any stitching software in order to get a truly seamless stitch.
I’ve had zero problems using LrC’s stitch feature.
This is seven vertical frames, stitched in LrC, 30mm lens (24mm FF equivalent), Arca C1 head, RRS Nodal Slide:
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Landscape/Landscapes-1/i-74X7t7b/0/1e641ccf/L/6E900739-5EB5-4D47-A5F9-13CD89E2D57B-L.jpg)
Rand
-
Water ripples, waves, white “streaming” etc., that isn’t in the same place in each part of an overlapped frame - and therefore doesn’t stitch well - can hardly be blamed on the stitching software. Layer blending in PS for those parts of the image would be better to “patch” the bad areas.
Using a wired remote control connected up to several cameras, I can get panoramic capture from 2+ cameras at more or less the same instant in time (i.e the same wave features are present in each frame.)
Where merging fails is at the horizon, which for all intents and purposes is a straight flat boundary between two shades of blue.
-
LR 11 does not fix this bug/problem. An example of LR's brilliance is attached (badstitch is raw merge output) where the sea merges with the land. LR11 goes one up on LR10 where the preview of a panorama merge looks ok (badstitch2) but the actual render of raw images (badstitch) ends up looking a total mess. At least with LR10 the preview matched the end result.
-
Here's 3 source files... reduced down to 1920x1200 fit for posting purposes... 22mm setting on Canon M6.
-
Rendered panoramas. First is from PTgui, second is from LR.
What's interesting to note is that PTgui curves the horizon while LR flattens it. Does this contribute to the problem with LR?
Unfortunately PTgui doesn't get the colouring right.
It doesn't matter if cylindrical, spherical or perspective are used from LR, all result in a tear.
-
Rendered panoramas. First is from PTgui, second is from LR.
What's interesting to note is that PTgui curves the horizon while LR flattens it. Does this contribute to the problem with LR?
Unfortunately PTgui doesn't get the colouring right.
It doesn't matter if cylindrical, spherical or perspective are used from LR, all result in a tear.
Did you use the same manual exposure on the three images?
If so it has to do with lens vignetting…
Curved horizon is a question of adjusting pitch probably
-
I took a look at them in LR and it would not find the right image for a pano. I think the main issue is that the overlap between them is not enough.
-
I took a look at them in LR and it would not find the right image for a pano. I think the main issue is that the overlap between them is not enough.
+1
Vignetting is huge , overlap too small, colours not equal-
Bad start
-
Did you rotate about the nodal point? This becomes more important when you have close foreground objects as with the boulders.
Beautiful spot!
-
+1
Vignetting is huge , overlap too small, colours not equal-
Bad start
The color shift in blue is not vignetting but CPL filter in action. When you've got a large field of view you will almost never get uniform color in the sky when using a polariser.
Did you rotate about the nodal point? This becomes more important when you have close foreground objects as with the boulders.
when using multiple cameras to do simultaneous capture to prevent issues with waves, rotating around a nodal point is not possible.
That set of 3 was at 22mm (*1.6). From another set of pictures, taken at 14mm (*1.6), I generated the attached image. As you can see, when merging raw images, the CPL issue becomes less of a bother.
If there's anything wrong, it might be that LR's algorithms don't work on narrower fields of view but that needs more testing. And by narrower, I mean anything narrow than ~24mm (FF). But that doesn't explain the "works for preview but not full images."
-
Compared to earlier releases of LR that I'd tried, the LR panorama merge is a much better proposition.
In some instances I now prefer it to PTgui because it gets colours better.
However...
All too often I see "tears" or "seams" in LR panorama merge output that PTgui does not have. Some examples of an obvious merge tear attached where it is failing to align the horizon and map the merge correctly.
I use this feature pretty regularly and I have not seen this problem in Lightroom since the early days of this feature.
-
Trying to merge images with solid blue skies can be very difficult. You can try to get the sky even across the frame but it always seems that the next image is slightly darker or lighter and this you see the dark band in sky between the images.
Make sure you have the latest version of ptgui as I find it does better on solid skies now. It’s not a free upgrade.
Also the curve in the bottom of top image is also a common issue and very simple to fix with photoshop and the manual warp feature. You will lose a bit of the image but you won’t have the curve. Usually works with little or no detail loss.
Another reason for problem is a polarized sky. You will always have issue trying to blend a solid blue sky across multiple frames if you have polarized them as the polarization effect will change as you move across the image. Even if you try to rotate the polarizer during capture.
Paul
-
Trying to merge images with solid blue skies can be very difficult. You can try to get the sky even across the frame but it always seems that the next image is slightly darker or lighter and this you see the dark band in sky between the images.
Make sure you have the latest version of ptgui as I find it does better on solid skies now. It’s not a free upgrade.
Also the curve in the bottom of top image is also a common issue and very simple to fix with photoshop and the manual warp feature. You will lose a bit of the image but you won’t have the curve. Usually works with little or no detail loss.
Another reason for problem is a polarized sky. You will always have issue trying to blend a solid blue sky across multiple frames if you have polarized them as the polarization effect will change as you move across the image. Even if you try to rotate the polarizer during capture.
Paul
Recently did a wide panorama of a cityscape with a clear sky, with maybe five or six images. Zero abrupt unevenness between images. Across the entire image? Yes, because the sky itself was uneven.
-
Thought I'd dust off an old favourite, Microsoft ICE. Order attached:
PTgui 12 (demo) - weakness: has dips in the horizon rather than a flat line/contiguous curve
ICE 1.4 - weakness: doesn't do the background as "1 picture" leaving "seams" in the blue sky; has dips in the horizon at the seam points
Lightroom 11.3 - weakness: tears in the horizon (horizon is not level) where there's a step up/down from two flat sea meets sky sections
-
In a private message, someone asked where to get Microsoft's ICE. Due to a reorganisation of Microsoft's website, you have to visit the wayback machine as mentioned here:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/252274/how-to-download-image-composite-editor-20.html
- the 64bit link therein delivers the goods.
I will say this, both ICE & PTgui are making Adobe's panorama stitching look very 3rd rate in terms of stitching flexibility.
-
[...]
PTgui 12 (demo) - weakness: has dips in the horizon rather than a flat line/contiguous curve
[...]
As mentioned earlier in the thread, adjusting the Pitch values will correct this. You can also add "Horizontal Line" control-points, and then PTGUI will usually fix it automatically (assuming there are horizontal lines to place them on).
-
As mentioned earlier in the thread, adjusting the Pitch values will correct this. You can also add "Horizontal Line" control-points, and then PTGUI will usually fix it automatically (assuming there are horizontal lines to place them on).
I've tried adjusting the pitch in Ptgui and didn't get anywhere. Couldn't find the horizontal line control point tool so put the demo version aside for now and will give it another try in the future.
I did however try Panorama Studio 3.6.2 to see if that was any better. It got the horizon correct but didn't equalize the white balance correctly nor get the sky blue correct (seams.)
-
I've tried adjusting the pitch in Ptgui and didn't get anywhere. Couldn't find the horizontal line control point tool so put the demo version aside for now and will give it another try in the future.
I did however try Panorama Studio 3.6.2 to see if that was any better. It got the horizon correct but didn't equalize the white balance correctly nor get the sky blue correct (seams.)
just adjust the pitch manually and you are fine in ptGui...
best made program i use
-
For what it is worth, landscape merging might be a little better in 12, but on images that I know I have previously flagged as "failed merge", it still fails. There also seems to be more use of the GPU, but need to test that out some.
-
Here's 3 source files... reduced down to 1920x1200 fit for posting purposes... 22mm setting on Canon M6.
Turn the camera to vertical format, overlap by 30%. I use the rule of thirds grid on my LCD to get a precise, consistent overlap, manually. I can shoot, move, shoot very quickly this way when necessary. You'll shoot more frames for the same “sweep” but you’ll get much better results. In this example the vignetting is causing a real problem. The difference in exposure between the right edge of the center frame and the left edge of the third frame is too great. One thing you could do to help is to put the histogram in LrC to show “Lab” values. Then use a linear gradient on the third frame and get the luminance of the blue sky on the left of the frame to match the luminance of the sky on the right edge of the second frame. Then stitch them. I actually helped a friend who had turned his camera vertical w/o reorienting his grad ND, and shot a whole series of pan shots. I managed to balance all the fames and make a good stitch.
Rand
-
Turn the camera to vertical format, overlap by 30%.
Thanks for the thoughts, but that style of shooting is not well suited for trying to do panorama shooting of beaches. Waves are a real problem.
And to top it off, just had my first LR crash (using v12) from trying to stich a big (20+ images) panorama (RAM was only at 69% used!)
-
Thanks for the thoughts, but that style of shooting is not well suited for trying to do panorama shooting of beaches. Waves are a real problem.
And to top it off, just had my first LR crash (using v12) from trying to stich a big (20+ images) panorama (RAM was only at 69% used!)
For that kind of work, I’ve put my GFX at 3 frames per second, then just “sweep the scene.” In post, choose a set of frames that “work.” Very rarely have wave mismatches. When I do, a little content aware fill in those sections can often fix it perfectly. Also since the GFX jpegs are “sizable” on their own I’ve once in while just stitched jpegs with excellent results.
Rand
-
For that kind of work, I’ve put my GFX at 3 frames per second, then just “sweep the scene.” In post, choose a set of frames that “work.” Very rarely have wave mismatches. When I do, a little content aware fill in those sections can often fix it perfectly. Also since the GFX jpegs are “sizable” on their own I’ve once in while just stitched jpegs with excellent results.
Thanks for sharing your method of taking photos and stitching to work around bugs in Adobe's software.
-
Just updated to Lightroom 13, there is still no improvement on this issue.