Never mind the quality feel the width

[arith]

or A bridge too far. I think it is difficult for me to take pictures of bridges, I will like to know how to get it all in and keep to rule of thirds; it must all be in. Tried out averaging again and this is 63 frames all at f2.8 1/5000 28mm equiv. I think possibly a lot of work since I still had to remove chroma and quite a lot of CA still but that was why I was doing it in the first place.





The bottom is just 7 frames without stacking but using Topaz DeNoise to clean, and rather a lot of cleaning it needed to. It is hard to tell which is the better.

[Alis]

Very nice shot, Arith! What did you use to stitch them together?

[carregwen]

You must have far more patience than I have. I think eight is the most I have ever done. You must have had a lot of overlap on each frame? It has come out well, though. The exposure is good, and it looks like a natural one-frame shot. I must try this!

[arith]

Very nice shot, Arith! What did you use to stitch them together?

Cheers Serif PanoramaPlus X4 but I'm not recommending it since it can't save to 16 bit.

[arith]

You must have far more patience than I have. I think eight is the most I have ever done. You must have had a lot of overlap on each frame? It has come out well, though. The exposure is good, and it looks like a natural one-frame shot. I must try this!

It is 7 frames each frame stacked with 9 images exactly the same, I'm trying out averaging but it takes a few seconds to capture each frame and so things that move get blurred.
Each frame is underexposed on highlights and hence underexposed by one ev to help reduce chromatic abberation, now I will try one without stacking. cheers

[arith]

Here is another 4 frame stitch; 50mm f6.3 around 1/1000 100 iso

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Steve,

I prefer the first shot(s), as you say, there's little to choose between them now they're done.

The later 4 frame stitch is showing signs of over-sharpening I think; there's quite a bit of 1 pixel wide peak white around some of the tree branches and church - against the not so white sky.

Both compositions are good, although the first might benefit from a little more left bank - but I guess that might include one of your infamous Burton "power towers" in shot

Cheers,

[arith]

Cheers Dave; I didn't notice the white stuff around the branches and wonder if it could be bi-cubic scaling with sharpening that did it, and of course you can have more left bank there is about half a tree more to the left.

Mind you there is an anti-blur on Topaz and this is the only way to get a halo but I remember bumping it up a bit, I worked on the left of the image and then just applied the same settings to the rest all 16 bit and then stitch, cropping and cloning is 8 bit only since the stitching program won't save to 16 bit but only does 8 bit tiff.

[arith]

Can you see it in this, just cropped out of the middle without scaling.

[Dave Humphries]

Cheers Dave; I didn't notice the white stuff around the branches and wonder if it could be bi-cubic scaling with sharpening that did it,

Ah, yes, Bicubic sharper can do that.

No, I don't see it in the following image.

Cheers,

[arith]

Actually I think I've made Burton look quite big and nice looking; but it is mostly all the same spot. To the right of the church picture there is power lines, just 100 metres further on and you can see the concrete monstrosity with the Victorian suspension bridge behind. I might add it wasn't finished when the workmen started to repair it, they took down part of the inscription on it and not yet put it back. Across the river is where all the swans go; this side they are dangerous since they have nests here, also the lovely car park and those benches.

I also noticed another monument but whoever does these things doesn't think of the photographer since both parts are split in the middle by a path, I suppose I could get a big mirror.

From here it is probably less than a kilometre to anything I've ever photographed in Burton.

[arith]

Is this what you mean Dave, if you put more on the left don't you have to stick more on the right to balance, I don't know.

[arith]

Cor I've just noticed posturisation on the left sky.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Steve,

Actually I think I've made Burton look quite big and nice looking

Oh, I agree (Perhaps you should offer them to the local tourist information centre) and I'm not kidding.

I also noticed another monument but whoever does these things doesn't think of the photographer since both parts are split in the middle by a path, I suppose I could get a big mirror.

Or do it in Elements

Is this what you mean Dave,

if you put more on the left don't you have to stick more on the right to balance

Yes, sort of.
I don't see why, I think it would look a bit more balanced without the extra added on the right, bringing the right hand edge of the bridge ironwork almost onto a third.

Not that I am asking, expecting or intending you to do this; but a bit of a crop on the last version to remove the extra added on right, but no more than that, because the path through the wall/railings is important to the composition too.

Cheers,

[arith]

Cheers Dave; I will get it right, I will.

[Dave Humphries]

Cheers Dave; I will get it right, I will.

If you ever find what "right" is, do let me know

Rather like Pops' sanity, which he has me on the look out for, I don't often find I'm 'right'

Cheers,

[arith]

This is a lot of work; I've chosen the 63 frame image and did some work on the flag and ducks, also redone CA so not so much obvious without taking too much colour out of the flag.