Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Panorama
Outer limits for a pano?
May 27, 2020 11:23:52   #
UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT
 
I was using the lockdown time to review old photos and decided to put together a large set (20) of photos from Canyonlands Island in the Sky. The first post is the result, which you can see falls off on both sides of the pano. The second shot is what I was able to salvage and the third post is another pano from the same area.

I used Lightroom and I could not put together the first pano in "Perspective" view because of so many photos. I then used "Spherical". Any ideas or suggestions?


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
May 27, 2020 12:01:34   #
Cany143 Loc: SE Utah
 
A number of factors can --and will-- affect the 'falling off' effect you describe. Its less a matter of Lr's (or any pano stitching software's) mode of interpolation than it's how the shots were initially shot. In effect, unless each of the images were shot with the sensor plane (or film plane) completely level and both parallel and perpendicular to the horizon, upon stitching there'll be a slight keystone-ing, either inward or outward depending on how much up or down off-axis the sensor plane was, in the final image. In panos comprised of relatively few shots, there'll be relatively little keystone effect and it'll be barely noticeable, but in panos made of many shots, the effect will be compounded and will become a problem that can be corrected after the fact.

In your pano (#1), you shot slightly downward, so the sensor plane of your camera was tilted slightly down-axis. This resulted in your 'falling off' problem. There are several ways to fix the problem, and the easiest of those are to either shoot with the SP dead on perpendicular to level, or to 'correct' the falling off in Ps. One 'formula' would be >Select >All …. >Edit >Transform > Warp (or Perspective or whatever works best), then using the 'handles' in the Transform tool, adjust as necessary. (Its easier to do than it is to describe.)

<Edit:> I generally 'over shoot' when shooting panos. Doing so allows for having some 'extra' material left and right (or up and down, depending) to crop while doing post perspective corrections.

Reply
May 27, 2020 13:13:55   #
UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT
 
Cany143 wrote:
A number of factors can --and will-- affect the 'falling off' effect you describe. Its less a matter of Lr's (or any pano stitching software's) mode of interpolation than it's how the shots were initially shot. In effect, unless each of the images were shot with the sensor plane (or film plane) completely level and both parallel and perpendicular to the horizon, upon stitching there'll be a slight keystone-ing, either inward or outward depending on how much up or down off-axis the sensor plane was, in the final image. In panos comprised of relatively few shots, there'll be relatively little keystone effect and it'll be barely noticeable, but in panos made of many shots, the effect will be compounded and will become a problem that can be corrected after the fact.

In your pano (#1), you shot slightly downward, so the sensor plane of your camera was tilted slightly down-axis. This resulted in your 'falling off' problem. There are several ways to fix the problem, and the easiest of those are to either shoot with the SP dead on perpendicular to level, or to 'correct' the falling off in Ps. One 'formula' would be >Select >All …. >Edit >Transform > Warp (or Perspective or whatever works best), then using the 'handles' in the Transform tool, adjust as necessary. (Its easier to do than it is to describe.)

<Edit:> I generally 'over shoot' when shooting panos. Doing so allows for having some 'extra' material left and right (or up and down, depending) to crop while doing post perspective corrections.
A number of factors can --and will-- affect the 'f... (show quote)


Thanks, Jim. Probably would have helped if I had used a tripod. At the time I was just attempting to get a sense of the sweep of the view. Live and (hopefully) learn.

Reply
 
 
May 27, 2020 13:21:36   #
Cany143 Loc: SE Utah
 
UTMike wrote:
Thanks, Jim. Probably would have helped if I had used a tripod. At the time I was just attempting to get a sense of the sweep of the view. Live and (hopefully) learn.


A tripod helps --for obvious reasons-- but it isn't absolutely necessary. The vast majority of shots I take for panos are shot hand-held. Sometimes its a matter of being on way less than level ground where setting a tripod up and getting everything level/perpendicular/etc would be impractical, and sometimes its simply a matter of me being excessively lazy. Main thing to keep in mind is to over-shoot and plan/expect to crop/correct in post.

Reply
May 27, 2020 14:50:47   #
UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT
 
Cany143 wrote:
A tripod helps --for obvious reasons-- but it isn't absolutely necessary. The vast majority of shots I take for panos are shot hand-held. Sometimes its a matter of being on way less than level ground where setting a tripod up and getting everything level/perpendicular/etc would be impractical, and sometimes its simply a matter of me being excessively lazy. Main thing to keep in mind is to over-shoot and plan/expect to crop/correct in post.


Arigato, Sensei!

Reply
May 27, 2020 15:19:16   #
juan_uy Loc: Uruguay
 
When a thread has a complete and clear answer as Jim's, the thread will be very short :)

Reply
May 27, 2020 16:47:20   #
UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT
 
juan_uy wrote:
When a thread has a complete and clear answer as Jim's, the thread will be very short :)


And I count my blessings for that. Thanks for looking in.

Reply
 
 
May 28, 2020 06:41:02   #
nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL
 
I like them!

Reply
May 28, 2020 09:47:22   #
David in Dallas Loc: Dallas, Texas, USA
 
Very nice!

Reply
May 29, 2020 18:13:23   #
Cwilson341 Loc: Central Florida
 
Impressive!

Reply
Jun 17, 2020 10:07:15   #
Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA
 
Cany143 wrote:
A number of factors can --and will-- affect the 'falling off' effect you describe. Its less a matter of Lr's (or any pano stitching software's) mode of interpolation than it's how the shots were initially shot. In effect, unless each of the images were shot with the sensor plane (or film plane) completely level and both parallel and perpendicular to the horizon, upon stitching there'll be a slight keystone-ing, either inward or outward depending on how much up or down off-axis the sensor plane was, in the final image. In panos comprised of relatively few shots, there'll be relatively little keystone effect and it'll be barely noticeable, but in panos made of many shots, the effect will be compounded and will become a problem that can be corrected after the fact.

In your pano (#1), you shot slightly downward, so the sensor plane of your camera was tilted slightly down-axis. This resulted in your 'falling off' problem. There are several ways to fix the problem, and the easiest of those are to either shoot with the SP dead on perpendicular to level, or to 'correct' the falling off in Ps. One 'formula' would be >Select >All …. >Edit >Transform > Warp (or Perspective or whatever works best), then using the 'handles' in the Transform tool, adjust as necessary. (Its easier to do than it is to describe.)

<Edit:> I generally 'over shoot' when shooting panos. Doing so allows for having some 'extra' material left and right (or up and down, depending) to crop while doing post perspective corrections.
A number of factors can --and will-- affect the 'f... (show quote)


There are at least 2 kinds of factors affecting your ability to combine images. One is the sensor. We will assume all 'pixels' are functioning equally and this is not a factor. The other main one is the aberrations of the lens used. If you have any curvature of field, other aberrations or lower resolution across the field of the sensor, the images will reflect this when you attempt to splice them together.

Finding a 'flat field', high resolution, even light distribution across the field for any lens is asking a lot. Most camera lenses are not made with a 'flat field,' even light distribution and attempts to have equal high resolution across the entire picture. Probably the lenses with the most optical design correction for this 'shopping list' are macro lenses, used for picture taking of a normal (not macro) scene.

IMHO, it might include using a lens originally designed for a larger format camera and using just part of the total optical field for the placement of the camera's sensor.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Panorama
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.