Photo stitching

[big jim]

One from this morning, iphone again, just 3 pictures, view from my hotel room overlooking birmingham airport runway

 

[A_S]

How is this one?

 

original_Panorama1 small by Andrew_S84, on Flickr

 

I was trying my Star filter (that creates the stars around the lights) for the first time, I haven't got a lot of experience with night time landscapes but I think it came out quite well. It was a combination of 5 shots taken last night after I had been to the O2

 

I wasn't quite happy with the overall exposure so I increased the exposure another half a stop or so and adjusted the highlights a bit

 

original_Panorama1 V2 small by Andrew_S84, on Flickr

[eastwestdivide]

Love the colours in those last two panoramas, but not sure about those star filters (I think I had a 6-point starburst? at one point). I reckon you get a better effect if there's only one bright light source in the photo, like a headlight, as it draws the eye to it. With a panorama like that, it can look a bit contrived - at least to my eyes. Especially that very bright sign at the top of the building, light blue-ish, about 1/3 in from the left, and the line of low-level lights to the far left. What do other folk reckon?

[jazz]

My first effort using the software that came with my new Cannon G12.  The view from my WB window. Made up of three photos, you can just about make out the shadow where the stiching is done in the sky.

 

 

 

[A_S]

Another one from me:

Edinburgh from Calton Hill:

 

 

edinburgh_Panorama1 v2 as Smart Object-1 by Andrew_S84, on Flickr

 

Any thoughts - a friend who does a lot of semi pro motorsport stuff says its too over processed for his liking but I like the detail/contrast myself


In respect of the star filter - after trying it again last night on the cityscape above i agree it doesn't really work for that type of photo - too many, too inconsistent and to disorganised in terms of light spruces and therefore stars - I think you have to have the right subject - I've seen it work very well on bridges and images where a single feature dominates the photo.

Andy

 

edit: re edited in camera raw - increased the blacks and changed the colour balance a little

[raymw]

Hi Andy,

 

What thoughts do you want? I think it was you who I  replied to on some other thread wrt hdr. Far too over-processed for me, too. It also looks 'flat'. The blown out sky area implies bright sunshine, but I see no shadows. Nice enough composition/location, but for the on-screen resolution, there was no need for stitching. One day you'll get some nice weather, maybe try again at one of the golden hours.

 

I liked your previous image -original panorama1 v2. If it is a ps filter, then maybe reduce the star effect. You can get a similar effect by stopping down to something below about f22, without a filter. You will need a high iso, and/or a long exposure, which is pretty if you have moving vehicle lights, and it will also remove people.

 

You can have fun with filters - have a bit of plastic (cd jewel case) and make a few scratches across it, and hold in front of the lens, then of course the stuff with Vaseline, nylon stockings, etc. - all the things that used to be used in 'real photography days'

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[A_S]

the previous was a physical star filter rather than a photoshop effect  - i'm still to master when and how to use it - not had a lot of chance, it did work well on the christmas tree.

 

In terms of this image - it was taken about 6pm - there was a lot of cloud and not many shadows, even on the unedited image

 

http://i779.photobucket.com/albums/yy72/Andrew_S_F1/edinburgh_Panorama1noedit_zps91495f94.jpg

 

I've now re-uploaded the original with increased blacks which darkens the exposure a bit and edited the colour balance. its a fine line to strike - the default settings on camera raw pretty much replicate what I did.

[RedgateModels]

Guess where.....

 

 

or here .....

 

 

Good times as ever captured with my X10 and Microsoft ICE

[glenng]

one of mine from Wells-Next-The -Sea in Norfolk

[Thomas]

 

Still worth a visit while four still remain. ( or anytime ) Two pics stitched.

 

Tom.

[Douglas G]

I have been having a play around with various free photostitching programmes to see which works best for me for a background.

 

I did take some digital photos at Dulverton for a background but lost them when I changed computer and had the photos on an old memory stick that required a driver on a disk, which I lost.

 

I also have some prints of photos taken a few years ago on my old 35mm film camera in automatic mode in very hazy conditions that I have scanned in. They are far from ideal and have varied exposures so they are a good test of the capacity of the programmes to produce a smooth panorama.

 

These are the original pictures I used:

 

 

I have two more pictures to the left of the first image, but I hardly overlapped number 2 with number 3 above, and none of the programmes I tried could recognise that they joined up, so I have just used images 3-6.

 

The programmes I have downloaded to test are Hugin, Autostitch and Microsoft ICE.

 

The interface for Hugin is very complicated, although there is a tab for a simple menu.  When it processes the images you get a screen of code while the software runs its calculations.  I got variable results with Hugin and at times it could not process the images, even with the same files. The JPEG file produced is 2.73 MB, too big to upload on RMWeb, and shows a strange effect that the left end is underexposed and the right hand end is overexposed and yellow looking.

 

This is the Autostitch panorama JPEG image:

 

 

It is only 158 KB as a JPEG. Autostitch has not coped very well with the different exposures, so the right-hand end appears dark and the joins are quite apparent. But it is easy to use - you just open up the source files and it produces an output file. There are no complicated menus or displays.

 

Finally, this is the panorama from Microsoft ICE:

 

 

Microsoft ICE is very easy to use - you just open up the source files and it produces an output file almost immediately. The JPEG file produced is 998 KB, so I wonder if it has more definition than the image produced by Autostitch.  The differences in exposure have been evened out by the software and the joins are hardly noticeable.

 

This is the Microsoft ICE panorama cropped to show how it would be in my model of Dulverton:

 

 

Considering the poor quality of the original images, I think it works really well.

 

Next step will be to get some high quality images at Dulverton when the weather and light is better - unfortunately I live a long way away. On the basis of these results, I think I will go for MS ICE as the software to use for a backscene, especially as the website says there is no limit to the image size it can deal with. The backscene will be around 12-13 feet long, so will need to be high definition to be blown up and printed successfully.

 

I have also downloaded the GIMP photo editing programme and have been playing around with the clone and stamp tool as a way of getting rid of the station buildings, trees and the old railway embankment at the bottom of the panorama. These will be replaced by cloning to show the fields behind the station and embankment.

 

Douglas

[westerner]

I suspect that the hazy look will work better as a back scene than if they were crystal clear and sharp.

[Douglas G]

I suspect that the hazy look will work better as a back scene than if they were crystal clear and sharp.

I think you are right. I know that on Black Country Blues Andy toned down the colours of the back scene using Photoshop but in my test photos this effect happened naturally because of the weather conditions. Adding a tinge of white-blue should give the effect of distance.

[Thomas]

The new roof at Manchester Victoria station under construction.

 

over twenty pictures stiched,

Four of the twenty stiched

Four pictures stiched.

13 September 2014

 

Tom

 

[lakeview770]

Our local lake smack in the middle of town

 

 

Andy