Shall I do a pano ot not ?

Antonio Correia · August 8, 2006

This is a photo to be used as document for the future.
Here it does not pay to make a pano.

Lens: 16-35 mm f2.8
1. 16mm one shot

2. 16mm pano

Melted by:

marlof · August 8, 2006

yeah, but esp. if you'd have gone horizontal and vertical, you might have had quite some additional resolution to get the same image. Just zoom in on the image, and shoot the same shot in portions. If that kind of work adds something is depending on your needs with the shot.

Antonio Correia · August 8, 2006

marlof wrote:

yeah, but esp. if you'd have gone horizontal and vertical, you might have had quite some additional resolution to get the same image. Just zoom in on the image, and shoot the same shot in portions. If that kind of work adds something is depending on your needs with the shot.

I have to make some more tries ...
Obrigado by the comment Marlof

):

marlof · August 8, 2006

I think your second (pano) image already benefits from the series of vertical images. Each portion is a 8 megapixel image. If there's not too much overlap, the second image should already contain more detail than the first. If you let it all overlap a lot, that advantage is mostly lost. Since you need some cutting space, it helps to shoot precise from a tripod.

Antonio Correia · August 8, 2006

marlof wrote:

I think your second (pano) image already benefits from the series of vertical images. Each portion is a 8 megapixel image. If there's not too much overlap, the second image should already contain more detail than the first. If you let it all overlap a lot, that advantage is mostly lost. Since you need some cutting space, it helps to shoot precise from a tripod.

I am not following you.
Do you mean:
Shoot with the tripod and do not get too much overlap ?
Shoot with the tripod and get many overlaped pics ?
Sorry.

Nikolai · August 8, 2006

Antonio,

Antonio Correia wrote:

I am not following you.
Do you mean:
Shoot with the tripod and do not get too much overlap ?
Shoot with the tripod and get many overlaped pics ?
Sorry.

1) Shooting horizontal panos in portrait mode definitely helps to get a higher resolution, since you get a better height
2) When shooting from a tripod you can allow less overlaps compared to handheld, especially if your software is good. However, from what I read, it's recommended to overlap at least 25%..30% in the pano direction.
3) When doing ultra wide panos of the otherwise linear objects (street/buildings in your case) you need to pay attention to the fact that your side images will cover much greater area with the same angle than your center ones. Depending on the stitching software you may get different effects and distortions...

HTH

Antonio Correia · August 8, 2006

Nikolai wrote:

1) Shooting horizontal panos in portrait mode definitely helps to get a higher resolution, since you get a better height
2) When shooting from a tripod you can allow less overlaps compared to handheld, especially if your software is good. However, from what I read, it's recommended to overlap at least 25%..30% in the pano direction.
3) When doing ultra wide panos of the otherwise linear objects (street/buildings in your case) you need to pay attention to the fact that your side images will cover much greater area with the same angle than your center ones. Depending on the stitching software you may get different effects and distortions...

HTH

Thank you Nikolai.
Those are good points.
Now, please look at this pano.
The white light on the church is the moon.
This is the S. Julião's Church. The statue is from a XVIII century poet: Manuel Maria Barbosa du Bocage.

Nikolai · August 8, 2006

Antonio Correia wrote:

Thank you Nikolai.
Those are good points.
Now, please look at this pano.
The white light on the church is the moon.
This is the S. Julião's Church. The statue is from a XVIII century poet: Manuel Maria Barbosa du Bocage.

Well, let me start by congratulating you on a great cultural environment you had a chance to photograph, and on a very good job doing that

I like the low angle vantage point and the general lighting.

Now, if you want me to get really picky (you did want that, didn't you?

)...

Just like with your church shots, your camera seem to be pointed at an angle to the horizon. This leads to a so called "keystoning" distortion, which becomes especially noticeable as you pan further from the center. While we recently discussed the admissibility of the "convergence" in architectural shots, I don't think it's a desirable effect in pano shots, since it produces different level of distortion in different frames and the total image suffers from this difference...

Besides, for some reason, in all all your pano shots (church, construction zone, this one) you seem to start from the middle and then panning to the right. In this case you doom yourself to having the smallest (left hand part) area of your image with minimal distortion level and having the rest of the image with gradually increasing level of distortion. I understand that sometimes composition calls for certain camera location in a scene, but maybe it's not a good target for panoramic work, at least without a tilt-shift lens...

Now - how can we avoid this keystoning effect?
I briefly mentioned the solutions when we were discussing convergence.

The first and the best is to get a tilt-shift lens. I know, I know, you're in Portugal, no easy way to rent it, and it's an expensive piece of glass.
However, architectural pano seems to be your thing, so I would at least consider getting it in the long run...

Second, and kinda cheating way of doing that is to utilize wider lens than you normally do and keep the camera strictly parallel to the ground, simply making sure that the top part of the scene fits your frame. Bottom part of the final image will be later trimmed off and sacrificed to the God Of Distortion-less Photography, but due to unskewed camera position at every angle you'd only have to deal with horizontal distortion, which is way less obvious.

HTH

pathfinder · August 8, 2006

Nik's is correct in his comments about keystoning, but I sill think Antonio's lower pano is very nicely done. The color and the composition rock!:):

The pano of the broken concrete I do not appreciate, except as a technical enterprise. The church pano sings to me!

Nikolai · August 8, 2006

Oh, I totally agree

pathfinder wrote:

I still think Antonio's lower pano is very nicely done. The color and the composition rock!:):

Image rocks, I was only neat-picking

pathfinder · August 8, 2006

Antonio Correia · August 9, 2006

I understand that "neat-picking" means go deep in critique.
Good. That's good. Make me (us) improve.

Nikolai, I did not begin the pano by the center but by the left. In the sense we read ...

Thank you for the comments. Very usefull.

Pathfinder: obrigado to you too. I almost forgot to thank you ... How could I ?! ...

:

to both and the others.

I'll make more panos. Today I shot in the Church for 1,30 hour.
I had no time to see them yet.
But I do have panos !

Nikolai · August 9, 2006

Neat-picking continues

Antonio Correia wrote:

Nikolai, I did not begin the pano by the center but by the left.

Antonio,
I apologize for not expressing my point more clear.

I was referring to the primary linear subject of the shot..

It goes like this (pardon the drawing quality):

Each pano is consisting of five equally angled shots. However, as it easy to see, in setup #2 the last two (rightmost) shots, while covering the same angle, cover more than half of the subject (and then some), hence delivering the most distortions.
Add this to the inevitable keystoning due to the non-horizontal camera positioning - and you got yourself a hard-to-cure case...

As I mentioned before, your night plaza pano is gorgeous.
We're only discussing purely theoretical aspects of the low angled pano shots...:):

Cheers!

Antonio Correia · August 10, 2006

Thank you Nikolai.
I got your point.

Antonio Correia · August 18, 2006

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=366057#post366057
please

Antonio Correia · August 19, 2006

+

=

I like these soft panos. (with only 2 or 3 photos)
I turns out OK.

Antonio Correia · August 23, 2006

Today after dinner I went to the Fortress of S. Filipe (which I have been wrogly calling as castle) and had the chance of getting the church opened.
I shot this picture and some others.
Can I have your opinion please ?
Obrigado.

with this result after merging the 3 photos.

I had to make it a square or else I would not get a large area.

:

Nikolai · August 23, 2006

Antonio,
This is a very cool shot! Great lighting!

I finally start digging your idea. You're increasing the "wideness" of your angle, thus compensating for the lack of super wide rectilinear lens :-)

My only remark would be that it looks a bit bland and dusty:-).
Maybe you could consider some minor curves treatment to give it a little pop...

Thank you for sharing!

Antonio Correia · August 24, 2006

Nikolai wrote:

This is a very cool shot! Great lighting!

I finally start digging your idea. You're increasing the "wideness" of your angle, thus compensating for the lack of super wide rectilinear lens :-)

My only remark would be that it looks a bit bland and dusty:-).
Maybe you could consider some minor curves treatment to give it a little pop...

Thank you for sharing!

Tjank you Nikolai for the comment.

I thought I had told you that I like to make "soft panoramics" - panos that don't take too much and imulate the wide angles - but I probably have not.

Thisi photo is a little bland indeed.
The light to the roof is white fluorescent (horrible) and the light from the door and window is rather bluish because it was late in the day.

Rather difficult for me to balance these 2 colors...
I do have tryied.

May be I'll try again.

Unfortunaly today evening I won't be able to work on photography...:): Something else calls me ...

:

Regards.

Nikolai · August 24, 2006

Antonio,
I personally don't mind the blue hint at all, it kinda looks nice as is.
Just a little but of curves (I'd do it in LAB, but that's me) would make it much better..

Antonio Correia · August 29, 2006

etc

I like panos this way.
It results from the melting of 15 photos.

One can not tell if it is a pano or not.
I have to try with the 24-70mm at 70mm and see the result getting more field.
Thank you for watching and commenting IYP (if you please).

:

Antonio Correia · September 21, 2006

I could have shot "Setubal from the other side" with just one picture.
I prefered to do it with multiple shots.

+

=

Date Taken: 2006-09-17 11:36:20
Date Digitized: 2006-09-17 11:36:20
Date Modified: 2006-09-20 18:21:28
Model: Canon EOS 20D
Aperture: f/10.0
ISO: 200
Focal Length: 16mm
Exposure Time: 0.0025s (1/400)

Comments welcome.
Thank you.