Swans are really big.

[arith]

I couldn't do HDR because of a big white thing sticking its beak in front of the lens and another one playing with my leg.

So I underexposed and tried to raise the shadows but it seemed to aquire a lot of noise; is it still ok though or can I process it better?

[John C]

I'm not really seeing any noise although I must admit that I sometimes seem to have trouble seeing it when others can. I can see where the swans might be a problem when trying to do HDR photography.

[arith]

Cheers; I've tried to remove most of it. There was hundreds of swans and I took a lot of images but tried to find some that would stitch. Even then I had to clone one out and after seeing the image 100% notice I've been clumsy bluring.

I should have changed the shot to one of taking close ups of swans; I was able to get within inches of them or rather they came to me, and I don't feed them.

[arith]

Is this one better? no cloning needed but the swans a right at the edge. The bridge in both is bent to make it look straighter and since it is further away in this less bending is needed. However only the slightest distortion affects quality (apart from multiple right angle rotations) and I will have to wait before I can afford a proper panoramic head.

[eNo]

No noise to really speak off on this side either... I say don't obsess too much about it and let it be. If you print, it will disappear like magic anyway. Your second version would be better if it weren't for the fact that one of the swans are cropped.

[arith]

Yes I know eNo; it is a pity that happened. Trouble is that it was right at the edge and after bending the image ect I had no choice but to crop it.

I also always like a 20% overlap so couldn't get further right, besides I was a bit rattled by the swans that I tried to shoo off but found they were not bothered and I could even touch them.

They look a lot bigger close up.

[ScoutR]

Hi Arith: I like the first one especially when viewed full size. The big swan front right makes the photo, and everything else looks great to me. There is lots to see and everything is clear and in focus and I love the colours and the lighting on the swans.

I don't see noise here either, but I'm not not very good at analyzing these things. All of the things that you are worried about, I don't see. Could you explain to me where you see the noise and the blurring that you are worried about. It will help me learn. I'm more of a "look at it and Like it or don't like it" kind of person. I'm not saying the technical does not matter. In most cases if technically correct it probably falls into the "like it" category. Sometimes I see photos that just don't look natural too me, but I don't know why. They fall into the "don't like it" category. This one does not fall into that category. I really do like it.

You are right those swans are huge. I don't know if it is the lens perspective or what, but compared to the Canada Goose in the water on the right, the swans are much bigger than what I'm used to seeing around here.

Wendy

[arith]

Try to please too many might be a mistake but here goes. Cheers Wendy the swans a about four feet tall unless they get annoyed.

Last try for a bit:

[ScoutR]

I like the 3rd one. I know if it was my photo I would want to try to remove the obstructions and the goose (I think) along the river bank on the left side. I wouldn't be capable of doing it without cropping, which I wouldn't want to do, but that's what I'd want to do.

I think I see a smudge or blurr in the water to the left of the swan by the riverbank. Is this the problem you are trying to correct?

[arith]

Cheers Wendy; the smudge is my attempt to clone out a swan at a stitching point. My skill at cloning isn't as good as I would like and hoped nobody would notice.

The duck looks like it has lost its head but normally you get a ghost; same with the cloned out swan that I hoped would work but didn't.

Unfortunately the end of dof giant swan is in the background and I have tried to keep it even though it isn't in the second.

But when I rejuvenated a bit I will return to do it again; the stitching program I use is free and only works on jpeg, so I do one to see what I need then adjust the tiff frame images.

I quite like it now even though it is disaster recovery; I was going to do HDR and walked 2 miles to find hundreds of ducks and swans, although I would like some in it is difficult mixing HDR and a panorama especially since these seem to sense what your doing and try to mess it up.

cheers

[ScoutR]

The things you are doing are WAAaaaay beyond anything that I would even attempt. As for the blur where you took out the swan, the only reason I noticed it is because I knew you were trying to fix something so I went looking for it.

I don't think it would be noticed by the casual viewer (like myself) who would be more concerned with the overall view, which as I said before, I really like. I understand the need to try and get it the way you want it though, so hope when you go back to it you have one of the Ahaaa moments and are able to get it fixed. Leave all the swans in it though

Wendy

[arith]

Cheers Wendy; I will now I've had a closer look take an hour or two on the frame causing the problems.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Arith,

Just a note to say I went down by the river yesterday and the swans were very nosey/inquisitive. I assumed it was because I was carrying a couple of shopping bags they expected food from, but although one or two came up and stood right beside me, once there, they did nothing, no 'leg pulling' as you encountered, nor diving into the bags

Just as well because I believe all the Mute swans in England are owned by the Queen and since I was in Windsor, within sight of the castle, I think they'd take a dim view of people/me attempting to fend them off. Wouldn't want to end up in the dungeon (although I have been there once).

I stood still and didn't panic or give any sign of being intimdated, but I have to admit, it did rather distract me from the shots I was trying to take. And of course they were just far too close (at elbow distance) to focus on, so couldn't become a subject in themselves

Hi Wendy,

As Arith says, 4 foot when placid as shown, but could stretch neck and body to six feet easily and with a similar wingspan.

Cheers both,

[arith]

It's nice in Windsor. If you don't bother the swans sooner or later they will become inquisitive and where one goes the rest will follow.

They are quite friendly but can mess up your shot considerably. I tried to shoo off the ringleader but he wasn't having any of it; of course I didn't want to frighten him because he was big, but I did give him a long look in the eye about one inch from his face and he didn't blink.

I was about to give up when all his mates turned up, and I have had one with its wet head in my pocket, when they dispersed and went back round the other side of the bridge apart from four or five some of whom ended up in the photo.

I think they are hungry because a tuck shop just across the river where bread is sold for feeding them is shut for the winter; I think next time I will buy a loaf of bread to give to them so they leave me alone. But I am flattered they trust me so much.

[arith]

Last version.

Actually it is quite hard so I might try something easier next time; like a cathedral.

[ScoutR]

Much better, the blur is gone. I think you are the only one who would know that the change in the water where you have done the work is anything but the natural movement of the water. That's just my opinion. A trained photographer might spot it right away, I don't know. It looks good to me and a big improvement on the original blur.

I notice you removed the ducks at the far left along the shore. Is it possible to remove the cement cone from the same area? I know your are probably tired of working on this one, but even if you don't want to remove it, is it possible to do? The reason I ask is because I always have things like this in my photos that bother me, but right now I have no way of removing them. What software did you use to remove the ducks.

Sorry to be such a pest.

Wendy

[arith]

Cheers Wendy; I use Helicon Filter and set the cloning brush to 100% edge detection, hardness 48%, intensity which is a bit like opacity 100% and various brush sizes.

Trying to follow a pattern in the water and taking my time over it. It is only the third time I've tried to do it but it looks ok now.

Your right about the concrete post, but I think it is in two frames. I'll have to get myself a decent stitching program using autostitch as an engine but the only one I've seen that I can afford has an example in their gallery with a broken unmatched flag pole.

So I will have a little rest now.