Stitching: I learned about something the other day. It's called stitching and the information came out of the discussion of the work of Andreas Gursky. Someone pointed out that Gursky...

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

I learned about something the other day. It's called stitching and the information came out of the discussion of the work of Andreas Gursky. Someone pointed out that Gursky hadn't done a good job of stitching in his Photograph "Rhine II." I thought this photographer was talking about actually using thread & needle. Boy, how dumb can you get.

Anyhoo, I decided to try a stitch job myself. Here are four panels from my Dumpster Dive Series which I took to the max on saturation and played around with the hue slider. Then I took the four shots and "stitched" them together. I can not detect any stitching. The four panels are the same size. I used my clone tool like crazy to obtain this result. Does anyone see where any stitching has been done. And if you were not expert at this stuff could you tell the difference.

Dumpster Dive - 4 Panels Stitched

(Download)

flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico

I use stitching quite frequently in my photographic efforts to attempt to convey the immensity, the sweep or grandeur of a scene, whether it is a Sierra landscape or an urban skyline.

I use Photoshop's panorama panel in conjunction with Lightroom to achieve this and if you use the Flickr website link below this message, the first image in the photo stream is an example of one that I took on the road out of the Bodie Ghost Town State Park here in California. I have also posted some on UHH, too.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

jim hill wrote:

I learned about something the other day. It's called stitching and the information came out of the discussion of the work of Andreas Gursky. Someone pointed out that Gursky hadn't done a good job of stitching in his Photograph "Rhine II." I thought this photographer was talking about actually using thread & needle. Boy, how dumb can you get.

There is a "someone" who has posted that on a number of forums. But the facts are not correctly stated.

The Rhine II print was not processed with an early version of Photoshop as is usually claimed.

The Rhine II print is huge! It is 12 tall and 6 feet across... and all you will ever be able to see on the Internet is a 1024 pixel wide photograph of the original. Not even a digitally resampled image!

Anyone who claims they can see stitching or cloning artifacts in what we are able to view, is exercising significant imagination.

I would suggest it is more interesting to analyze the intensity and direction of that imagination, rather than give it an credit.

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

Apaflo wrote:

There is a "someone" who has posted that... (show quote)

I was privileged to view Rhine II at MoMA in 1971. I have never forgotten the experience. I recently posted "The Most Expensive Photograph In The World" which to date has 17 pages of conversation.

I think you meant to say the photograph is 6 feet high by 12 feet long.

I don't think anyone can see the stitching in my quad piece.
Maybe with specialized equipment they can do that but I doubt it.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

jim hill wrote:

I was privileged to view Rhine II at MoMA in 1971. I have never forgotten the experience. I recently posted "The Most Expensive Photograph In The World" which to date has 17 pages of conversation.

I think you meant to say the photograph is 6 feet high by 12 feet long.

I don't think anyone can see the stitching in my quad piece.
Maybe with specialized equipment they can do that but I doubt it.

Yes, 6 high and 12 wide. Sorry about that!

You are, near as I can recall, the only person I've seen commenting based on actually looking at a Gursky original! Wow. I would imagine that any of Gursky's originals would be awe inspiring.

I didn't follow the thread on Gursky and generally don't find those discussion to be of any value at all. Not just here on UHH, but on any forum. Very little of what is said pertains either to anything logical or to reality!

I just took a relatively close look (200% magnification) at your image. More correctly, I looked at the top edge. I cranked up contrast and then looked at it with brightness turned up and again with brightness turned down. Nothing jumped out to bite me. Must be pretty well done.

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

Apaflo wrote:

Yes, 6 high and 12 wide. Sorry about that! br br... (show quote)

Thanks Apaflo. I find that many of those commenting not to be knowledgeable in art for art sake. I get the feeling that most of our compatriots are interested more in equipment than the art itself.

Upon viewing Rhine II I was so overwhelmed that I had tears in my eyes after leaving its space.

And thank for looking closely at my abstraction of four panels. I appreciate you effort.

gypsy02 Loc: Indiana

Spent some time looking at your download - very nicely done. I don't know what your Dumpster Dive Series is but I think this abstract would be great printed off on a large canvas! Love it!

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

gypsy02 wrote:

Spent some time looking at your download - very nicely done. I don't know what your Dumpster Dive Series is but I think this abstract would be great printed off on a large canvas! Love it!

Thanks gypsy02. The Dumpster Dive Series is a major body of my work. I have submitted 2 three picture set to this forum so far. Doesn't seem to be much interest in them. They have been well received in the art world however.

Thanks for your kind remarks. I think it's going to 60" on the long side stretched canvas.

joe west Loc: Taylor, Michigan

i dont have to stitch them together my sony camera has it built-in

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

joe west wrote:

i dont have to stitch them together my sony camera has it built-in

Hey Joe West,

I have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about. Do you mean that you could have taken four different photographs from my collection which I cropped for my quad 4 pano and and done what with your camera?

Does this Sony camera figure out what part of the edges I have bumped up together, reading my mind as to which parts I want to overlap and which need to be overlapped to make a smooth transition between one photograph to another.

You do realize that we are talking about four completely different photographs, taken at four different times and at four different places - do you not?

I think we must be talking about two completely different "stitching" processes. Are we?

Maybe I should introduce Sony to Jerry Uelsmann. Would save him a lot of work. I think he used arond 16 or so enlargers to make his stitched photographs. How did they look. Google him to find out.

joe west Loc: Taylor, Michigan

jim hill wrote:

Hey Joe West, br br I have absolutely no idea of ... (show quote)

i dont have to take a series of pic's and stitch them together there a panaramic mood in my camera

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

joe west wrote:

i dont have to take a series of pic's and stitch them together there a panaramic mood in my camera

Oh, I get it. You have a panoramic camera - right? Or is that wrong.

Gee whiz - I must be behind the times or something. If I could have made the same shot that heads this thread with a one time exposure in the camera I would have saved myself hours of work.

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

joe west wrote:

i dont have to take a series of pic's and stitch them together there a panaramic mood in my camera

Oh, I get it. You have a panoramic camera - right? Or is that wrong.

Gee whiz - I must be behind the times or something. If I could have made the same shot that heads this thread with a one time exposure in the camera I would have saved myself hours of work.

joe west Loc: Taylor, Michigan

jim hill wrote:

Oh, I get it. You have a panoramic camera - right? Or is that wrong.

Gee whiz - I must be behind the times or something. If I could have made the same shot that heads this thread with a one time exposure in the camera I would have saved myself hours of work.

i have a nex 5r shoots pana, 2 ways 3d and reg, also shoots hdr, and raw and all the other good stuff

jim hill Loc: Springfield, IL

joe west wrote:

i have a nex 5r shoots pana, 2 ways 3d and reg, also shoots hdr, and raw and all the other good stuff

Does it automatically make fine photographs?