Hotel strip

[rob marshall]

I shot this this afternoon in Swansea. I was cycling by and thought the strip would make an interesting shot. But the length of it seemed too much for a single shot, and I was restricted in distance from the buildings by a sea wall behind me. So, I took four shots. but I moved my physical position for each shot, starting at the right, then moving left for each subsequent shot. I used a set of railings at the roadside edge to get the same distance from the building for each shot. The total physical length shown in the shot must be about 200ft of buildings.

When I stitched the shots in CS5 there was very little distortion around the edges as I had been facing the buildings directly for each shot. Does all that make sense?

Comments welcome. Anyone tried this method, rather than standing in the same spot to take the pano shots?

See it on black

[Donald]

Masterful. Way beyond my skill level and ability.

I've never heard of a a stitch resulting from the photographer moving in a linear way along a row of buildings as you describe. But, you've made it work. Not just competent. But a superb image as a result. Lovely muted tones.

[rob marshall]

Lovely muted tones.

Thanks, Donald. Yes, the colours are good despite me shooting it on an extremely bright day in harsh sunlight. See this thread... A day of exceptional clarity

[jeeperman]

Hmm, interesting. Have not yet tried this. You really did get almost 0 distortion, providing the outside edges are as is. Nice.

[jiro]

Hmm, interesting. Have not yet tried this. You really did get almost 0 distortion, providing the outside edges are as is. Nice.

I saw this technique before but never this good. Flawless if I may say. Well done, Rob.

[ilovelucydog]

Your images are always amazing, Rob. You did have a great blue sky today.

[Sam Smith]

Rob how much overlap if any did you use? NICE shot.

[Peter Ryan]

Hi Rob,

I tried this recently in our local village but parked cars caused some issue with blending. Good job.

[Snarkbyte]

Very well done, as usual, Rob. I have read of this technique, though I don't remember where, and I 've never tried it. The only real drawback to this is the shift in perspective that can be seen in the row of three lofts near the center. You can see both sides of the center loft, as if it were trapezoidal (with the sides "fanning out" away from the viewer). It's something to look out for, but in this case, I doubt I would have seen it if I hadn't been looking for it, and the only reason I looked was because you mentioned the technique. Again, nicely done.

[Colin Southern]

... the length of it seemed too much for a single shot, and I was restricted in distance from the buildings by a sea wall behind me.

Stuck with one of those darn primes again by any chance?

[rob marshall]

I saw this technique before but never this good. Flawless if I may say. Well done, Rob.

Actually, there was a flaw. I forgot to press the 'lock exposure and focus' button when I changed positions and two of the shots didn't match on the road at the bottom, so I had to crop it out. Silly me! But because I used the railings (which were just in front of me) I had the same lens-to-building distance length for all shots.

Rob how much overlap if any did you use? NICE shot.

I think I had about 20%. I reckoned I wouldn't need much as there would be very little angle distortion.

Hi Rob,

I tried this recently in our local village but parked cars caused some issue with blending. Good job.

This was actually an extremely busy road, and there was a set of lights to the right, so traffic kept slowing and queuing. I had to wait for my chances to get it car free.

Stuck with one of those darn primes again by any chance?

It's 14-45mm on the G1 lens. And it has a 2x crop factor so it's equivalent to 28-90mm. It just didn't look right when I tried to get it all in on a single shot. Using a stitched shot I managed to get more width, and had more detail - the final stitch is nearly 7k pixels in length. This is a full-size version JPEG (not sure if this is going to show properly.