Advantages to stitching images?

[rpcrowe]

I have done a number of landscape panoramas handheld, without worrying about nodal points etc. As long as there are no objects close it works surprisingly well. You need a bit of practise to make sure you keep the horizon at the same level though, handheld it is easy to start creeping up or down with each new exposure. And, unless you are only going to join two or three exposures, using portrait orientation is a good idea - a tapeworm-shaped panorama has rather limited uses..

I need to mention that, although doing a hand held pano is pretty easy (if you use correct technique) I don't know how a person could accomplish this using the LCD as a viewfinder. Many digital have no viewfinder. If all of them dis not, I would still be shooting film rather than digtal...

[Manfred M]

The portrait orientation gets you a higher image, so the shot is not quite as long and strung out. That is why it is commonly used for panos.

[chauncey]

Probably should have mentioned that memory thingy...I'm running 24 of RAM and sometimes keep track of my memory usage via the performance section of Windows Task Manager (cntrl/alt/del).

[Andyjo]

I have done panoramas before. I recently did one on a family Holiday using a gopro (not a real digital camera I know but I took it for convenience sake). Even using its super wide angle lens I needed to do a panorama to get the shot. I actually did this from video (no tripod) at 4k.



Stitching isn't brilliant though.

Andy

Andy

[jcuknz]

How simple it is and how much equipment you need depends on your ability in editing ... so long as you give yourself the overlaps and keep the camera as close as if it was on a tripod etc you should be AOK. Also becuase you are after a wide view do not use a wide angle lens but better a longer length and more frames ... last one I did I used 90mm on the zoom to reduce the sky and foreground content.

I am of two minds as to manual or automatic exposure ... my usual use of panos requires upward and past a dozen frames and with manual there is a definite possibility that the exposure for the first frame will result in a 'way out' exposure at the end ... whereas with auto you get a range of exposures but this is fairly easy to adjust for in a good editing programme ... you need the ability to handle layers I think.

At one time I had a need for panos to create backgrounds for model railway layout but haven't taken one for over a year now as I am not of the 'get it all in' perswasion, rather selection of the essentials.

Without saying anything against those who set themselves up with gear I am well aware that it is quite possible to move the camera considerable distance between frames ... just makes the stitch as bit tricky

There is a type of photography which does require equipment and very expensive stuff at that .... when you take the 'four square' approach to extremes and capture 180 degress horizontally and vertically and more.

I did my first panos with a 3.3Mp P&S by Canon [s20] which taught me the basic overlap requirements and the resulting file size was within the capability of my editor to handle it using the CanonStitch assembly programme but today with a 16Mp camera I normally quarter the file of each frame prior to editing as my programme has a limit to the number of pixels it permits one to use ... a bit over 30,200pixels across. [I do have an earlier version which doesn't have this limitation]

[Shadowman]

Very nice.

[ajohnw]

There is a decent introduction some of the things Hugin can do here



Plenty more video's and more information on it's web page.

John
-

[ajohnw]

Another not so good video that demonstrates a bit more of Hugin's power.



Like most open source it's refined and changed regularly. Currently I believe the manual is closely aligned with the software.

John
-

[inkista]

Aside from higher resolution and going wider, there is also the fact that you can make panos that are physically impossible to take as a single image, no matter how wide your lens goes.

The panos I shoot are 360x180 panos, with full spherical coverage. Not just 360 all-the-way-around cylinders, but sphere/cube views that can give you straight behind, below, and above as well as what's in front and to the sides. You can find a lot of images of Scripps Pier. But mine's a little different.



This is an equirectangular mapping of the sphere, where the latitude and longitude have simply been changed to x,y Cartesian coordinates, like a typical flat map of the world vs. a globe.

It can be warped on-the-fly to create a VR pano, where you can drag around to rotate the sphere (requires Flash, and probably a bit of time to load).

This particular pano was shot (some time ago) handheld, four images taken with the Sigma 8mm circular fisheye lens on a Canon XT/350D, and then stitched together in PTMac (Hugin or PTGui would be the most similar packages you could use today).

The interesting thing is that once you have this kind of coverage, unlike with other panos, remapping can lead to its own form of amusement. You may have seen "little planets" that use these types of panoramas with stereographic mapping:



These types of "little planet" images are physically impossible to do with a lens, because you've got 360 FoV coverage, while the most even a circular fisheye lens is going to be capable of is 180.

But you can get a LOT weirder if you want to,when it comes to remapping:


Peirce's quincunx tiled in a Droste spiral ala the Gimp, Mathmap, and the quincuncial script.

[chauncey]

While the rational of large images may not rank very high on one's priority list, stitching does allow for some big images. This dove image is 30" on the long side @ 300 ppi. Looking close, one can see the camera in it's eye.

[drjuice]

I'm with Colin on this one (and it's interesting to see your thoughts on this).

When the LA Science Center's shuttle (Enterprise) arrived at LAX, I had occasion to try my first stitching. My objective was to get as big a final result as I could (mebbe not a photographic reason, but I have seen so many of them taking off as well as Challenger blowing up from the roof of the building where my office was located at the University of Florida -- which got me one of those flyspecks of a bird picture -- the chance to see the tiles and other pieces and parts from close up was an opportunity I wasn't about to miss). So, I got as close to the shuttle as I could, stuck my camera to my tripod with a small offset, and went for it. I took 3 portrait oriented images. It took me 94 seconds (including reading a help page to find out which menu the stitch function lived in) to stitch the pictures together in Corel Draw! which includes an app called Photo-Paint. I used that app just because it was already installed on my computer. And, it worked just fine.

The three-panel image is available here:


http://4114us.net/photography/HETRICK-Sometimes,EndeavourJustComesRollingByYourBanksPark ingLot-75%.png

After I made this and a few appends to other threads, I headed out to the Post Office to collect my papermail. In the box was the March issue of Outdoor Photographer with Bill Neill's article called "On Landscape: The Quest To Be Better" The photograph illustrated at the beginning of the article is a "stitched" picture of two frames showing some dead leaves, apparently on the ground and the whole effect is really excellent. This photograph would be a fantastic image on which to base new camouflage designs. It begins on page 32. Unfortunately, the article is not online yet, but you may want to keep an eye out, both for the image and for an outstanding discussion of the intellectual property value of imagery.

I have to say that I probably wouldn't give this particular closeup a second look, but next weekend I expect to be in an area where similar leaves may be on the ground and you can bet I'll be keeping an eye out.

virginia