Comments on: The 42 foot wide Liverpool Skyline HDR http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/ Daily photography from Liverpool and beyond Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:42:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Vibhu http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-26813 Vibhu Sun, 08 Feb 2009 09:56:01 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-26813 This is quite an economical way that you've detailed. Thanks for that; encourages the others to lighten their work process, or just experiment. I'm surprised that the 8MP print, stretched out to 1m both ways, was detailed enough. What did you keep for your focus point and how did the depth-of-field come out? I can't say anything much from the (much, much) smaller versions posted here :) This is quite an economical way that you’ve detailed. Thanks for that; encourages the others to lighten their work process, or just experiment.
I’m surprised that the 8MP print, stretched out to 1m both ways, was detailed enough. What did you keep for your focus point and how did the depth-of-field come out? I can’t say anything much from the (much, much) smaller versions posted here :)

]]> By: Rick Larsen http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-24513 Rick Larsen Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:32:41 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-24513 Pete, Great work! Truly great! I am amazed that you did a 9x3 without an indexing head. I have one I built from Manfrotto parts, but greatly improved on some of their machined components. I tried a few multi-row shots by hand and gave up and went to an indexing pan head. I use the head for pans, but also for large format outdoor shots like 7x6 frames and more. The way you did the HDRs is the only way I've found possible. Stitching distortions are not the same from image to image, so the HDRs must be combined before stitching. I typically do 30 to 40% overlap, especially for images that lack detail or contrast. A lot of my shots are waterfalls here in Tennessee, and the falls, like your ocean, lack synchronized points for the software to lock onto, so I have to do occasional hand stitching, although PTgui does work better than any other software I've tried. I often have a lot of very close foreground, so my camera and pan head are calibrated for precise rotation around the exit pupil. Like you, I have had great results with Genuine Fractals for taking large pans and making them larger. The results never cease to amaze me. Pete, Great work! Truly great! I am amazed that you did a 9×3 without an indexing head. I have one I built from Manfrotto parts, but greatly improved on some of their machined components. I tried a few multi-row shots by hand and gave up and went to an indexing pan head. I use the head for pans, but also for large format outdoor shots like 7×6 frames and more. The way you did the HDRs is the only way I’ve found possible. Stitching distortions are not the same from image to image, so the HDRs must be combined before stitching. I typically do 30 to 40% overlap, especially for images that lack detail or contrast.

A lot of my shots are waterfalls here in Tennessee, and the falls, like your ocean, lack synchronized points for the software to lock onto, so I have to do occasional hand stitching, although PTgui does work better than any other software I’ve tried. I often have a lot of very close foreground, so my camera and pan head are calibrated for precise rotation around the exit pupil.

Like you, I have had great results with Genuine Fractals for taking large pans and making them larger. The results never cease to amaze me.

]]> By: Pete http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-24457 Pete Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:04:38 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-24457 @Rob Louw - I tone mapped them in Photomatix using my normal settings and saved them as a JPG. I then built the pano in Ps and edited it further. I think it took under 5 minutes for Ps to work its magic. @Erik Zimmerman - Thats a typo. I shot one pano in portrait and one in landscape. They chose the landscape pano. I will correct that. Shooting in portrait does allow you to get more detail because it requires you to take more photos for the wider shot. @Rob Louw – I tone mapped them in Photomatix using my normal settings and saved them as a JPG. I then built the pano in Ps and edited it further. I think it took under 5 minutes for Ps to work its magic.

@Erik Zimmerman – Thats a typo. I shot one pano in portrait and one in landscape. They chose the landscape pano. I will correct that. Shooting in portrait does allow you to get more detail because it requires you to take more photos for the wider shot.

]]> By: Erik Zimmerman http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-24455 Erik Zimmerman Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:44:13 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-24455 Pete, Great shot, I love it! I'm a little confused regarding your technique. You mentioned you shot the HDR pano in portrait, but in your Lightroom screenshot you show them in landscape. I've always read that when shooting panos you should shoot portrait mode - is that a myth? Did you have better success shooting landscape? Pete,

Great shot, I love it!

I’m a little confused regarding your technique. You mentioned you shot the HDR pano in portrait, but in your Lightroom screenshot you show them in landscape. I’ve always read that when shooting panos you should shoot portrait mode – is that a myth? Did you have better success shooting landscape?

]]> By: Rob Louw http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-24450 Rob Louw Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:33:56 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-24450 I note that you produced HDR images (presumably using Photomatix software?) of each set of photos before merging them into a panorama. The question I have is did you use the default Photomatix seetings for the HDR conversion and then save the resulting image as a TIFF or a JPEG file? Presumably you applied no further adjustments to the HDR images in Photoshop before creating the panorama? What Photoshop adjustments were made to the panorama after it was created? How long did it take to stitch it together? I have tried assembling an HDR panorama myself but took a different approach. I first stiched the the sets of three exposures together into thre panoramas and then tied to merge them to HDR. Not surprisingly this method failed as each panorama had a slightly different number of pixels. I plan to try your method in London this weekend. Are there any other tips which you could offer? RAL I note that you produced HDR images (presumably using Photomatix software?) of each set of photos before merging them into a panorama. The question I have is did you use the default Photomatix seetings for the HDR conversion and then save the resulting image as a TIFF or a JPEG file? Presumably you applied no further adjustments to the HDR images in Photoshop before creating the panorama? What Photoshop adjustments were made to the panorama after it was created? How long did it take to stitch it together?
I have tried assembling an HDR panorama myself but took a different approach. I first stiched the the sets of three exposures together into thre panoramas and then tied to merge them to HDR. Not surprisingly this method failed as each panorama had a slightly different number of pixels.
I plan to try your method in London this weekend. Are there any other tips which you could offer?
RAL

]]> By: General Photography Competition #155 - Ultimatecarpage.com forums http://www.vanilladays.com/gallery/2008/08/the_42ft_wide_liverpool_skyline_hdr/comment-page-1/#comment-24075 General Photography Competition #155 - Ultimatecarpage.com forums Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:53:30 +0000 http://www.vanilladays.com/?p=2576#comment-24075 [...] Originally Posted by John Thawley It's not these two.... one is 18mm and the other shot at 21mm Why wouldn't you just back up a few feet... shoot wide and crop to a panoramic? I don't see the reason for all the Photoshop stitching gyrations. JT Its not that simple. The more you back up on this shot the more of the foreground will be in the picture and less background. Your theory would have worked if I had wings or a pocket helicopter maybe. And by the way, I didnt plan on doing a panorama when I originally took the pictures, I thought I might try it afterwards. I got the idea from this guy: Check it out [...] [...] Originally Posted by John Thawley It’s not these two…. one is 18mm and the other shot at 21mm Why wouldn’t you just back up a few feet… shoot wide and crop to a panoramic? I don’t see the reason for all the Photoshop stitching gyrations. JT Its not that simple. The more you back up on this shot the more of the foreground will be in the picture and less background. Your theory would have worked if I had wings or a pocket helicopter maybe. And by the way, I didnt plan on doing a panorama when I originally took the pictures, I thought I might try it afterwards. I got the idea from this guy: Check it out [...]

]]>