Panoramic in church - Setubal Portugal

Antonio Correia

My 1.st attempt on a panoramic inside a church

Awais Yaqub

this is beauty but it dont look like a pano

Skippy

Antonio Correia wrote:

My 1.st attempt on a panoramic inside a church

Nice work Antonio........ lovely lighting inside the church too.
Skippy (Australia)

illuminati919

I love the lighting of this shot, the only thing thats bother me is the little white piece on the left side of the frame. It merges with your frame and causes a distraction to my eye. But nice photo overall.

Nikolai

Antonio,
I know this is not a whipping post, however, since you were always looking for c&c, I'll give you some now:-)
----
This is not a pano. or at least it does not look like one. Wide angle shot - yes, pano - no.

You have previously posted an image from this point, and unfortunately I have to repeat - this is not a good point, for this church and for this focal length at least. You got tons of perspective distortions all over the place, with practically no horizontal of vertical line left intact.

Part of the image, including people far right, is totally blown out.

In general, churches are dark (and you were saying so yourself when you were describing the project and asking for technique). Maybe this one is not so dark, but in this picture it's anything but dark. If there was any mystery associated with darkness - it's nowhere to be found on this image

There is a piece of something (lighting fixture?) on the left border which cries to be cut/cloned out.

----

All in all, I hope that vantage point above the entrance you were talking about would work better...

All the previous suggestions you were given stay: different point (s), tripod, multiple exposures, possible HDR, etc.

HTH

Richard

Nikolai wrote:

This is not a pano. or at least it does not look like one. Wide angle shot - yes, pano - no.

I agree with most of Nik's comments.

I don't know the precise technical definition of pano, but in my mind there are two factors. The first is the aspect ratio, which is much wider than tall. This pic does not qualify. The second is that mulitple exposures are stitched into a single frame, increasing the total pixel count and thus permitting larger prints to be made with high resolution. Assuming the stitching is seamless (which is hard to judge at less than 100% size) using multiple exposures could give better results than a single wide angle shot here, as there is a lot of fine detail in the ornamentation. Just a thought.

Regards,

Seefutlung

Generally a wide to tall ratio of 2:1 is considered a panorama.

Antonio, have you thought of renting a T/S lens? The Tilt/Shift would eliminate or at least reduce converging lines.

Antonio Correia

Seefutlung wrote:

Generally a wide to tall ratio of 2:1 is considered a panorama.

Antonio, have you thought of renting a T/S lens? The Tilt/Shift would eliminate or at least reduce converging lines.

Gary.
I tell you what I told to Nikolai:
: Where do you think I am ? I am in Portugal, the market is much smaller To rent a lens I would have to make 256 phone calls, go to Lisbon, and probably with no sucess. :

To buy a lens ? Oh no.
I don't have time now but I have written someting today during the afternoon I'll post later.
I have visits today and I will not be able to be here.

The visits are: and his wife and daughter and his wife and daughter...
......

Antonio Correia

I am sorry but they couldn't come and here I am for a while.
Thank you Richard for your opinion.

Nikolai, Richard and Gary. Good afternoon.
How do you do ?

I want to thank you for the comments.
I am always eager of critiques and comments, which makes us to improve.

As a matter of fact, IMHO, the photo I posted is supposed to be a pano, because it results from the melting/merging of 3 or 4 pictures.
Under these circumstances the EXIF is gone.
It’s pretty obvious that the perspective is wrong and I have noticed it.
And so was the previous shot I posted somewhere which was worst than this …
I was testing so enthusiastically the program I have got the other day for merging photos, that I forgot I had already posted it and it has been commented.
Anyway, this photo represents an improvement regarding the other as we can see. Not good enough though.
Indeed, what you are saying now, you said it before…
And that, I can remember.

I post here another merge/pano from several photos I shot in the Republic of Ireland.
This one is very successful because the photos are well merged. Hand held. The perspective was not a problem.

composed from
123456789101112

this one is very good also

This picture is the melting of 7 photos handheld but I must shoot with the tripod, which I did not use and which importance is bigger as we are closer to the subject when the perspective is increased, with the same lens.
In spite of the difficulties the result is pretty good.

My “Church project” has already begun when I posted photos, etc. etc.. I am going to shoot on location, the 9 th August.
I’ll let you know the results under a new thread with the tittle: “Setubal. Portugal - Church project”
I'll use this melting technic which looks pretty good to me. :

But, now that I remember, let me ask you Nikolai:
With what purpose have I been shooting those tests of under and over exposure ?
Stupid question may be, but I myself, with your help and other’s, came to this rather small but important conclusion:

1. I will shoot underexposed pictures ( (-1/3); (-2/3); (-1) ? )
2. 100 ISO – I’ll use 200 ISO if that’s OK because it sounds better :
3. Small apertures as 5.6 or 8, may be 11
4. Slow speeds
5. Reflectors like white linen
6. Tripod
7. Self timer as I don’t have any cable release
8. Gray (grey) card for the white balance
9. Instrument for measuring the distances
10. The wide angle I got 16mm set to the HD at the aperture required.
11. Lots of work and dedication.

I’ll shoot minimizing perspective, as near to the axis of the church as possible.
All the equipment will be present for photographing the details.
All the lights from the church will be turned on as well as some candles…
I give the priest a small contribution :

I’ll have problems with the white balance but I’ll have to overcome this problem with LAB (when I learn to do so).

Regards. Thank for the attention.

The melting gallery is at:
http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/gallery/1735736

Antonio Correia

Just a merge of 2 photos...

ChrisJ

Antonio Correia wrote:

Just a merge of 2 photos...

Hi Antonio, I think this is much better than your previous church pano. It still looks more wide-angle/fisheye than pano, but it's definitely beautiful. If you added a third shot showing more of the pews, then you'd be in serious pano territory.

Antonio Correia

ChrisJ wrote:

Hi Antonio, I think this is much better than your previous church pano. It still looks more wide-angle/fisheye than pano, but it's definitely beautiful. If you added a third shot showing more of the pews, then you'd be in serious pano territory.

Thank you for the comment.
I do have other photos - not treated yet - but I don't think I have more panos.
If I do, I'll post them here.

Antonio Correia

I re-made this pano.
Better now...:):