Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: dreed on May 06, 2014, 05:39:34 am
-
If there is one thing that bothers me about stitching it is that it cannot (yet) be done with raw images - are there any whispers or quiet mumblings of anyone trying to resolve that problem or is it considered unsolvable?
And if it is unsolvable, is it because of the Bayer Matrix or ...?
The other question I have is about doing exposure, etc, adjustment prior to export rather than after importing the merged result. If 16bit TIFF is being used as the intermediary what sort of loss should I expect if I do postpone the exposure, etc, adjustments to after the stitching?
-
Well from what I understand about stitching is you need pixels and RAWs are not really pixels until they have been processed. The bayer pattern has nothing to do with it. The photomerge applications look for matching pixels and then makes decisions what to use and throw out regarding the stitch. As I said in the article look at the layers and click the eye button to make layers visible or not and see the way the program has decided to use pieces of the image. Since a RAW file is just data it would be very hard to do.
Also, as I mention in the article it is best to get as much from the RAW as possible prior to output. So, make adjustments on color, overall exposure, contrast and saturation, even a bit of highlight and shadow recovery prior to output. Do not crop, try any lens corrections or perspective corrections. Make sure the same corrections are applied to all images. This will certainly mess up the stitch. You can then as I showed do adjustments to tweak the look after the final file is complete.
Kevin Raber
-
I'm surprised you flattened the image instead of turning it into a smart object. Was it to simplify the lesson or is there a benefit to flattening?
-
As I said in the article sometimes I turn it into a smart object. Flattening just make it smaller and more controllable size wise. To keep the article simple without introducing what could be a whole other subject I just mention it. I have smart objects on a topic list as a lot of people don't quite understand them.
-
Also, as I mention in the article it is best to get as much from the RAW as possible prior to output. So, make adjustments on color, overall exposure, contrast and saturation, even a bit of highlight and shadow recovery prior to output. Do not crop, try any lens corrections or perspective corrections. Make sure the same corrections are applied to all images. This will certainly mess up the stitch. You can then as I showed do adjustments to tweak the look after the final file is complete.
Is there anything to gain by pushing the histogram of the pre-merged pictures as far to the right as possible (collectively) in a manner similar to ETTR with the view that some post work will be needed and is better supported by having more data?
-
Hi
I always use raw files as the source for a panorama and hadn't really thought about converting first. If you select in LR you can export the LR adjusted images directly to the Pano facility in PS. This means that you can adjust the WB etc in LR and then do the stitching from the LR adjusted raw file in PS (which presumable converts each file to a TIFF before merging).
Kevin - I note that you are using the arbitrary rotation in PS followed by a crop. Were you aware that if you move the cursor outside the image in crop mode that you can swivel rotate the image to level? You probably are and had a reason not to do this but just saying....
-
I followed the same procedure as above and ended up with the stitched picture seen below. This was shot with a Nikon D8000e and I enjoyed a cup of coffee while the stitching was going on in Photoshop. The new stitched image was huge and full of incredible detail.
Hey Kevin, when do the rest of us get to have a D8000e? ;D
-
Thanks for a great article. I've been shooting panos for a number of years now and have developed my own workflow over time. Your article provided me with a few good tips I'd like to try. I tend not to use smart objects as the file sizes slow processing down too much for my liking. These mini how-to's really enhance the experience at LULA!
Regards
Don
-
If there is one thing that bothers me about stitching it is that it cannot (yet) be done with raw images - are there any whispers or quiet mumblings of anyone trying to resolve that problem or is it considered unsolvable?
Microsoft ICE lets you drag and drop DNGs into it, after which it stitches them together. I'm not sure if other RAW formats are supported. Output is in another format (TIFF, JPG, other) however.
-
Microsoft ICE lets you drag and drop DNGs into it… I'm not sure if other RAW formats are supported.
Oh! I never thought to try that!
I just dragged 5 .arw (Sony raw files) and MS ICE created a composite.
However I think I'll continue to exploit the extra flexibility in the conversion from raw to tiff (currently using RawTherapee) before stitching.
-
The 1848 sequence of daguerreotypes depicting the Cincinnati, Ohio (USA), waterfront by Charles Fontayne and William Porter is one of my favorite images of all time. I suspect it would be difficult to exceed the level of detail (it required a microscope to reveal it) with current capture technology. In 2010, Wired published an interactive image viewer (http://www.wired.com/2010/07/ff_daguerrotype_panorama/) that allows users to explore the eight-image panorama.
-
Hi,
It would be to messy and would not offer any benefits. Autopanon Pro can handle raw files but it cannot output to raw.
One way to handle raw would be to use parametric editing, but it would be messy.
Also, it is probably best to handle chromatic aberration before merging into panoramics. Programs like Autopano Pro really handle distortion, so that would not be an issue. It is probably best to apply a decent amount of capture sharpening before locating control points.
My guess is that the technique would simply be to complex to work realiably.
The way I handle this is that I export my images as 16 bit tiffs with very conservative settings and merge to a 16 bit tiff and apply final adjustments to the merged image.
Best regards
Erik
If there is one thing that bothers me about stitching it is that it cannot (yet) be done with raw images - are there any whispers or quiet mumblings of anyone trying to resolve that problem or is it considered unsolvable?
And if it is unsolvable, is it because of the Bayer Matrix or ...?
The other question I have is about doing exposure, etc, adjustment prior to export rather than after importing the merged result. If 16bit TIFF is being used as the intermediary what sort of loss should I expect if I do postpone the exposure, etc, adjustments to after the stitching?
-
If there is one thing that bothers me about stitching it is that it cannot (yet) be done with raw images - are there any whispers or quiet mumblings of anyone trying to resolve that problem or is it considered unsolvable?
Aside from what Kev said...yes, there are some "whispers" and "quiet mumblings" regarding doing panos (and HDRs) from multiple raw files. But, nothing that can, as yet be reported...suffice to say that there are some pretty smart guys that have been working on these "issues"...but, it'll take some time.
So, best advice? Learn how to shoot HDR and panos...and know (expect) that some "bright boys™" might come up with some useful solutions that will resolve a lot of issues.
Some of the best digital photographers are also software developers...
-
Autofocus? Really? Having shot and stitched probably something close to a thousand panoramas of all kinds (PTGuiPro) I'd say this is asking for trouble.
Roy
Edit: Obviously this depends very much on the subject.
-
Aside from what Kev said...yes, there are some "whispers" and "quiet mumblings" regarding doing panos (and HDRs) from multiple raw files. But, nothing that can, as yet be reported...suffice to say that there are some pretty smart guys that have been working on these "issues"...but, it'll take some time.
So, best advice? Learn how to shoot HDR and panos...and know (expect) that some "bright boys™" might come up with some useful solutions that will resolve a lot of issues.
Some of the best digital photographers are also software developers...
Can I click "Like" for this comment?
On a more serious note, something that I have noticed is that PS stitching might be the best for colour but it doesn't always get the de-warping 100% correct. Prior to this article, I had been using Microsoft's "ICE" tool to do panoramas and whilst it seems to get the rotations down pat, it's not very good with colour - especially highlights and shadows (even when using TIFF).
Are there any other panorama stitching applications that people recommend?
-
Are there any other panorama stitching applications that people recommend?
Hi,
PTGUI (http://C:\Users\Bart\Pictures\Canon\1Ds3\Imatest\EF135mmF20\BestFocus\Converted) is very robust and allows a fast yet accurate workflow, but also can solve difficult issues if a bit more time is allotted to the task, or the free Hugin (http://hugin.sourceforge.net/). Autopano Pro/Giga (http://www.kolor.com/image-stitching-software-autopano-giga.html) is also not bad when it can automatically find a good solution (it gets a bit complex when trying to correct errors).
Of all the above, PTGUI (Professional) gives me the most reliable results (also for 360 degree VR scenes), so it's usually my first choice when I have to stitch something, and it is very fast (the current beta Version 10 uses GPU hardware acceleration).
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi,
PTGUI (http://C:\Users\Bart\Pictures\Canon\1Ds3\Imatest\EF135mmF20\BestFocus\Converted) is very robust and allows a fast yet accurate workflow, but also can solve difficult issues if a bit more time is allotted to the task, or the free Hugin (http://hugin.sourceforge.net/). Autopano Pro/Giga (http://www.kolor.com/image-stitching-software-autopano-giga.html) is also not bad when it can automatically find a good solution (it gets a bit complex when trying to correct errors).
Of all the above, PTGUI (Professional) gives me the most reliable results (also for 360 degree VR scenes), so it's usually my first choice when I have to stitch something, and it is very fast (the current beta Version 10 uses GPU hardware acceleration).
Cheers,
Bart
Well I've thus far tried Autopano and it appears to give me better results with warping than PS... will have to try PTGUI too...
-
Like I said we will be covering a number of alternative methods for doing panos in subsequent articles. There are a lot of choices. And, to my knowledge on RAW processing like Jeff said there are a number of good and bright people working on both HDR and Panos from RAW. But, the way I understand it now is that when you drag RAWS into any of these programs a temporary tiff or jpeg file is made so that there are pixels to work with. Alignment and such s all based on pixels and you don't get pixels until the RAW file is processed. I will confer with brighter minds on this, but this is my understanding.
-
Well I've thus far tried Autopano and it appears to give me better results with warping than PS... will have to try PTGUI too...
Hi,
One of the big differences is that Photoshop requires all full size images to be loaded as layers (with masks) which takes a lot of memory, and another is the lack of choice between the very good resampling algorithms that dedicated stitchers have to offer, and the limited projection options. It's a bit too much of a black box.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Thanks for this article. Just knowing how to hold the camera and pivot helps a lot.
-
I will second the comments about PTGUI pro, it will often do a better job IMO than photoshop. It has some great features. Well worth giving it a try.
Alan
-
What a great article! I love the emphasis on fun. It is a refreshing read from the regular "lock your $2000 head, level your $1400 tripod, don't even contemplate pressing the shutter without at least $10,000 in gear on top of it all" type of read we so often find on the internet. Or end up arguing about for pages on end.
And this coming from a guy contemplating whether to buy a Leica again or not. I think I'll pass but I do miss my 50mm summilux!
-
Thanks. If you haven't figured it out by now and it should be obvious from our videos and articles, I like to have fun taking photographs. It's my passion and my therapy. If I have a crappy day I go out and take a picture. I also like to keep it simple and concentrate on the image. There are days though where I'll get out the ALPA and Phase One back, lock everything down and shoot one image to perfection. I encourage everyone to try new things and to take your images to the edge. I have been doing this for over 42 years. I have had the most amazing time and career and if there is one thing I like to do more than anything else is to share the joy of photography with others. Take a workshop with me and you'll know what I mean when I say that. When I am out in the element I am on my game.
I'll have more articles like the Pano article coming. Pretty busy on a number of projects but there are a number in the works.
Once again thanks for all the responses here and by personal email.
Kevin
-
A useful introduction to the subject!
A friend sent me a set of scanned slides, taken back in the 70´s with the idea of making a scenic panorama. Photoshop had no problem stitching them into the panorama he had envisioned 40 years earlier.
One small note: The "20% overlap" usually recommended needs to contain some unique detail PS can identify - putting the overlap in the middle of a calm sea with cloudless sky can be asking too much even from this great program.
Lennart Elg, Sweden
-
One small note: The "20% overlap" usually recommended needs to contain some unique detail PS can identify - putting the overlap in the middle of a calm sea with cloudless sky can be asking too much even from this great program.
Hi Lennart,
Indeed, and that's where having more manual control will save the day. In e.g. PTGUI one just drags the individual image into place (WYSIWYG as it should be). It's something that frequently happens with portions of the sky as well, when using longer focal lengths.
There is more to be said about the percentage of overlap, especially when blending areas with different color balance, or lighting, or moving people, which is where I usually use 50% overlap, or even shoot multiple (=100% overlap ;) ) tiles to combat movement and remove ghosts. Having options as to the blending method used is also a useful feature of dedicated Pano Stitchers.
Cheers,
Bart
-
This is probably a statement of the obvious! If I want a high pixel landscape, then I take 3, 30%, overlapping images with my camera in portrait orientation. Stitching them (in PTGUI) gives me a 40Mp 3x2 image. So easy!
-
This is probably a statement of the obvious! If I want a high pixel landscape, then I take 3, 30%, overlapping images with my camera in portrait orientation. Stitching them (in PTGUI) gives me a 40Mp 3x2 image. So easy!
Hi Jonathan,
Exactly, easy and fun!
Lens distortion gets automatically corrected as well, and potentially also vignetting, should one choose to. I do prefer to remove any chromatic aberrations with the Raw converter first though, even though PTGUI can read Raws (which is useful for a quick check, to be refined at a later stage).
Cheers,
Bart
-
Other useful tools include Photoshop's Adaptive Wide Angle filter, for sorting out some of the odder transformations.
A shift (mainly Tilt-Shift these days) lens can give a panorama without distortion, and you can twist it round to go vertically and horizontally for a much larger image area.
-
Nice article Kevin. The part about photographing your hand between shots is a great idea. Even though I have heard of this trick before I keep forgetting about it when I am out shooting. Thanks for the reminder.
There is also another point I would like to emphasize for hand held panos. I'm sure you do this but I just want to emphasize it some more for anyone new to panos. After you have dialed in everything and take your first shot remember to not move at all until you have studied the first shot in your viewfinder and know just how much to move for the next shot. It's real easy to want to quickly move to the next shot before you have fully thought about how much to rotate so that you are getting a good 20% to 30% overlap. This methodical approach also helps you maintain a consistently level shot each time. As most of us have discovered inconsistent shots will translate into more cropping and sometimes cutting into important features in your image.
I primarily use Microsoft ICE for my stitches but after reading your article I tried the pano feature in PS CS6 and was pleasantly surprised to see that it has improved since I last tried it quite a while ago. I now consider it a solid option as well.
-Tim
-
...
It's real easy to want to quickly move to the next shot before you have fully thought about how much to rotate so that you are getting a good 20% to 30% overlap. This methodical approach also helps you maintain a consistently level shot each time. As most of us have discovered inconsistent shots will translate into more cropping and sometimes cutting into important features in your image.
I wonder if there's an "easy" rule here that each image should have an overlap of around 1/3? Or that if your viewfinder (or LCD) screens is divided into thirds, you take a picture when the left third is on the right or right third is on the left?
Now that I think about it, you probably want the edge of the panorama to be in the middle or opposite edge of that shot to ensure that you don't get caught out cropping what you actually wanted?
-
"Do not crop" may well be good advice in general. PTGui says so clearly.
Photoshop can be more lenient though. A single horizontal row of vertical shots can each be made much more slender as suits the different points in focus of an auto focused pano.
Not only are panoramas beasts of many parts, but they come as many sorts of beast. Three shots can make a neat square or sometimes even the ragged edge of dozens can be used.
I have mainly auto focused and enjoyed the effect. However, when OldRoy said I was asking for trouble, I remembered my recent efforts at focus stacking and my surprise at how different the frames were. He could have a point.
Thanks, for the article. I hadn't thought of stretching after the sticking , etc.
-
Just knowing how to hold the camera and pivot helps a lot.
Also see --
"I often use the index finger of my left hand as a rotational point, balancing the lens on my finger and rotating around that. I also shoot vertical panoramas by placing my finger on the side of the lens and rotating up and down around that point."
-
Panos can save the day when you break your wide lens while on a trip.
And one small tip if you have to use high ISO and have problems with automatically generating control points you might find it better to do some noise reduction before stitching. For example if you shoot stars or auroras.
-
When I shoot pano's I use Spherical Pano Head, and 85mm is my main lens.
Multi column/row panos the file size, as well as the rendering size can grow pretty quick with 40 to 60 images.
Using Autopano Pro I've had files that could render 80"x30"or larger, but I usually print half that size.
My question, if I rendered my pano at 100% in Autopano Pro to say 80"x 30" then down sampled in Photoshop to 40 x 15 for printing, would it be any different if told APP to render at 50%? I know the file size would be smaller, but if I ever wanted to print at 80 x 30 then I would have to recreate it.
-
For nodal adjustment can I use a basic Arca plate to offset rotation from the tripod center? I have done many panos with nothing close to avoid paralax. Now I would like to get a more precise nodal position. I was thinking a GH1 gimbal head, which I want for my long lenses, with a basic long plate. That seems better than getting a nodal ninja for 2x the money, than can only do panos.
-
For nodal adjustment can I use a basic Arca plate to offset rotation from the tripod center?
Hi Arthur,
Yes, that is possible, but I'd first try and roughly determine the location of the entrance pupil. It may turn out that the plate doesn't allow enough forward or backward shift to position the entrance pupil over the tripod's axis of rotation. You might need to add an extention bar to achieve the goal.
I have done many panos with nothing close to avoid paralax. Now I would like to get a more precise nodal position. I was thinking a GH1 gimbal head, which I want for my long lenses, with a basic long plate. That seems better than getting a nodal ninja for 2x the money, than can only do panos.
Do note that the principle of a gimbal head is about positioning the center of gravity over the center of the tripod for stability and 'gravity free' rotation. The Panoramic No-Parallax Point alignment most likely positions the center of mass at a different position, and the gimbal head needs a means to be locked in position to keep the pitch angle constant for longer exposures.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Thanks Bart,
The GH1 does have locks so that is ok. Yes, I will measure the node to the camera bolt hole offset first. Good thing you brought it up.