I was inspired by the current issue of Outdoor Photographer to go out today specifically to shoot panoramas. I tried to shoot the same way described in the article I read... not just a series of left-to-right frames, rather, multiple rows of left-to-right frames; use a prime lens to maximize sharpness.
I learned a number of things that can get you in trouble
(1) It's important to make notes to remember, for sure, the exact left-side start point and the right-side end point. Otherwise, you will probably have holes in the composite image after the rows are stacked on top of each other. This is what I ended up with for the image I posted in February Eight:
I could have cropped to a more pleasing image if the three images on the bottom row had extended as far to the right as did the three images on the top row.
(2) leave plenty of blank space around the edges, especially if doing a vertical panorama that is likely to have vertical distortion needing correction. I was using a 50mm lens so there was very little distortion, even after tilting the camera to get the top part of the museum. But, I simply don't have enough to work with here. I couldn't zoom with my feet (back up) because I needed to avoid left and right side construction fences that would have been too distracting to include. The solution is to revisit this location next year when those fences are gone:
(3) If all you are going to do with the image is post it on the internet, all of this is probably more trouble than it's worth. The whole point of using a short prime lens and making many exposures is to produce a very sharp, detailed image. This is fine if you are going to print it but all of that sharpness and detail is lost as soon as a jpeg is resized for posting. This image is made of 18 frames, nine across the bottom and nine across the top:
The full size composite is 94" x 15" (22,553 px X 3,687 px @240ppi) and would produce excellent detail if, for some reason, you wanted a print 7'10" long. The PSD file is 505MB in size. Here is a 100% crop of a piece way over on the left side:
The one posted in Pixentral is resized to 12" x 2" and most of the detail is lost except in large objects.
It was fun. As I said, I learned something. But, I will wait for spring or summer to play again ... just too darned cold to stand in one place and spend the time necessary to "do it right". If you want to read the article, it's here:
http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/how- ... ching.html
Rusty
I learned a number of things that can get you in trouble
(1) It's important to make notes to remember, for sure, the exact left-side start point and the right-side end point. Otherwise, you will probably have holes in the composite image after the rows are stacked on top of each other. This is what I ended up with for the image I posted in February Eight:
I could have cropped to a more pleasing image if the three images on the bottom row had extended as far to the right as did the three images on the top row.
(2) leave plenty of blank space around the edges, especially if doing a vertical panorama that is likely to have vertical distortion needing correction. I was using a 50mm lens so there was very little distortion, even after tilting the camera to get the top part of the museum. But, I simply don't have enough to work with here. I couldn't zoom with my feet (back up) because I needed to avoid left and right side construction fences that would have been too distracting to include. The solution is to revisit this location next year when those fences are gone:
(3) If all you are going to do with the image is post it on the internet, all of this is probably more trouble than it's worth. The whole point of using a short prime lens and making many exposures is to produce a very sharp, detailed image. This is fine if you are going to print it but all of that sharpness and detail is lost as soon as a jpeg is resized for posting. This image is made of 18 frames, nine across the bottom and nine across the top:
The full size composite is 94" x 15" (22,553 px X 3,687 px @240ppi) and would produce excellent detail if, for some reason, you wanted a print 7'10" long. The PSD file is 505MB in size. Here is a 100% crop of a piece way over on the left side:
The one posted in Pixentral is resized to 12" x 2" and most of the detail is lost except in large objects.
It was fun. As I said, I learned something. But, I will wait for spring or summer to play again ... just too darned cold to stand in one place and spend the time necessary to "do it right". If you want to read the article, it's here:
http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/how- ... ching.html
Rusty