OT - Panoramas

PeterC said:

Just seen this proggy for showing panoramic pictures. It can span
multiple monitors and do lots of other things. Might be of interest
to some of you.

http://www.wpanorama.com/wpanorama.php?r=1191224030

Thanks, I'll give that a try.

Quoted message said:

There are also some samples for download.

Some? There's loads! Many look really good too. Haven't looked at them close
up yet.

Most of the vertical panos don't look panoramic at all though, they just
look like a slice from a normal photo.

I quite like vertical panos though, and they're much easier to take than
usual horizontal ones since you only have to level the tripod in one
direction. I wonder why people don't take more? You get better a ratio of
height to width too, if you keep the camera horizontal then pan up, rather
than the long thin horizontal panos we usually see.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

Paul Saunders said:

PeterC said:

Just seen this proggy for showing panoramic pictures. It can span
multiple monitors and do lots of other things. Might be of interest
to some of you.

http://www.wpanorama.com/wpanorama.php?r=1191224030

Thanks, I'll give that a try.

Quoted message said:

There are also some samples for download.

Some? There's loads! Many look really good too. Haven't looked at them close
up yet.

I see the preview uses ptviewer. I have downloaded that and need to
play with it and implement it on my site.

Quoted message said:

Most of the vertical panos don't look panoramic at all though, they just
look like a slice from a normal photo.

I quite like vertical panos though, and they're much easier to take than
usual horizontal ones since you only have to level the tripod in one
direction. I wonder why people don't take more? You get better a ratio of
height to width too, if you keep the camera horizontal then pan up, rather
than the long thin horizontal panos we usually see.

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/Feb06/PICT1175.jpg

I'm now taking horizontal panos with the camera held verticaly to
increase the foreground. I'm also using a pano head which as well as
geting the rotational point alinged with the nodal point/entrance
pupil is dead easy to level using the built in bubble level.

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

I'm now taking horizontal panos with the camera held verticaly to
increase the foreground. I'm also using a pano head which as well as
geting the rotational point alinged with the nodal point/entrance
pupil is dead easy to level using the built in bubble level.

Got a link for that piece of kit, Phil ??

Chris

Chris Gilbert said:

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

I'm now taking horizontal panos with the camera held verticaly to
increase the foreground. I'm also using a pano head which as well as
geting the rotational point alinged with the nodal point/entrance
pupil is dead easy to level using the built in bubble level.

Got a link for that piece of kit, Phil ??

I can't remember the name of mine, hang on while I find it so I can
google it...

Nodal Ninja. http://www.red-door.co.uk/pages/heads.html
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

Nodal Ninja. http://www.red-door.co.uk/pages/heads.html

Thanks. Looks pretty portable, that. Now, where's
me credit card gone .....

Phil Cook said:

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

True; also unnatural for our eyes.
--
Peter.
You don't understand Newton's Third Law of Motion?
It's not rocket science, you know.

Chris Gilbert said:

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

Nodal Ninja. http://www.red-door.co.uk/pages/heads.html

Thanks. Looks pretty portable, that.

Yeah about 500g. I keep mine made up in L shape and just slip it into
the top pocket of my sac.

It's not very rigid especially on a lightweight tripod. When I use my
Canon 400D there is some movement with mirror slap so if you are using
slow shutter speeds I need to use mirror lock up. Then it's all too
easy to get out of sync and find yourself in the shot when you get
distracted and forget whether you have just locked the mirror or fired
the shutter before moving on to the next click stop.
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

It's not very rigid especially on a lightweight tripod.

I usually have a mid-range tripod with me. If only because
of wind. It should lend stability.

Quoted message said:

slow shutter speeds I need to use mirror lock up.

De rigeur on landscapes for me.

Cheers

Chris

Chris Gilbert said:

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

It's not very rigid especially on a lightweight tripod.

I usually have a mid-range tripod with me. If only because
of wind. It should lend stability.

Quoted message said:

slow shutter speeds I need to use mirror lock up.

De rigeur on landscapes for me.

Yes, it's just a shame Canon make it so awkward to use!
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Angletarn Pikes via Beda Fell.
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/May07/martin9.htm

Phil Cook said:

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

Nor do horizontal panoramas. Even a so-called widescreen monitor is only
1.6:1, practically the same as a standard 35mm or DSLR pic.

A real panorama needs to be at least 2.4:1, the same as the standard for DVD
films.

Two widescreen monitors side by side would be good for displaying a single
3.2:1 panorama.

What I meant about liking vertical panos is that if you only take say, 3
shots, the ratio is only about 2:3, about the same as a normal vertical pic.

Of course, you might as well use a wide angle lens and take a single pic
instead, unless you really need the extra resolution for a huge print. The
only other reason to stitch multiple pics is to take a true panorama, i.e.
wider (or higher) than you can take with a single lens.

Anyway, I think prints are really the best way to show off panos, if you can
get the damn things framed!

Quoted message said:

http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/Feb06/PICT1175.jpg

Is that multiple shots? Looks like a cropped wide angle shot.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

Phil Cook wrote

Quoted message said:

Yes, it's just a shame Canon make it so awkward to use!

On the 30D it's fairly easy to access as a custom function
on the menu. I'm looking forward to acquiring the 5D, which
has user customisable modes. That will allow me to switch
more easily between landscape and non-landscape without
the albeit small faff of using the menu.

Chris

PeterC said:

Quoted message said:

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

True; also unnatural for our eyes.

And yet vertical photos are really common, just look at magazine covers for
example. I don't think photos have to fit the shape of field of vision, but
having said that, I do have a particular liking for the 1.6:1 ratio,
horizontal.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Phil Cook said:

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

Nor do horizontal panoramas. Even a so-called widescreen monitor is only
1.6:1, practically the same as a standard 35mm or DSLR pic.

A real panorama needs to be at least 2.4:1, the same as the standard for
DVD films.

Two widescreen monitors side by side would be good for displaying a single
3.2:1 panorama.

What I meant about liking vertical panos is that if you only take say, 3
shots, the ratio is only about 2:3, about the same as a normal vertical
pic.

Of course, you might as well use a wide angle lens and take a single pic
instead, unless you really need the extra resolution for a huge print. The
only other reason to stitch multiple pics is to take a true panorama, i.e.
wider (or higher) than you can take with a single lens.

Anyway, I think prints are really the best way to show off panos, if you
can get the damn things framed!

I've a 360 deg paper picture pano with 13 or so vertical shots from The
Cuillin. Matched them and glued them on black paper and made my own wooden
frame. I think it's 5 ft wide and 1,5 ft high. Looks great on a wall.

--
"Beannachd leibh"

Theo
www.theosphotos.fotopic.net

Paul Saunders said:

PeterC said:

Quoted message said:

Vertical pictures don't fit too well with a 4:3 or wider monitor.

True; also unnatural for our eyes.

And yet vertical photos are really common, just look at magazine covers for
example. I don't think photos have to fit the shape of field of vision, but
having said that, I do have a particular liking for the 1.6:1 ratio,
horizontal.

Paul

Heres a good one from Colin Prior that I dont think would have worked in
landscape format.

http://www.colinpriorphotographyschool.com/articles/beinn-alligin-upper-loch-torridon-highland/

--
Mike
Some pictures of the Scottish highlands here http://www.prog99.com

Theo said:

I've a 360 deg paper picture pano with 13 or so vertical shots from The
Cuillin. Matched them and glued them on black paper and made my own wooden
frame. I think it's 5 ft wide and 1,5 ft high. Looks great on a wall.

I've created 'bubble' panoramas with a fisheye lens:

http://tinyurl.com/b24ju

Jim Ford

Mike said:

Heres a good one from Colin Prior that I dont think would have worked
in landscape format.

http://www.colinpriorphotographyschool.com/articles/beinn-alligin-upper-loch-torridon-highland/

I agree, nice one.

This one's not too disimilar in principle - 4 horizontal photos stacked
vertically.
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/misc/lyff_vp_original.jpg

And this one wouldn't have worked in landscape format either!
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/pg/pano/chimney1200.jpg

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

Theo said:

I've a 360 deg paper picture pano with 13 or so vertical shots from
The Cuillin. Matched them and glued them on black paper and made my
own wooden frame. I think it's 5 ft wide and 1,5 ft high. Looks great
on a wall.

Sounds cool.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

Jim Ford said:

I've created 'bubble' panoramas with a fisheye lens:

http://tinyurl.com/b24ju

How many shots?

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/

Phil Cook said:

I can't remember the name of mine, hang on while I find it so I can
google it...

Nodal Ninja. http://www.red-door.co.uk/pages/heads.html

Jeez! You paid £180 for that?

I'll just carry on using the same technique I'm using now then, namely to
choose a flat foreground clear of foliage and suchlike that are bound to
cause parallax problems. I don't take that many panos anyway, and for the
kind that I take, PTGUI is excellent at warping small parallax errors to get
a perfect fit. I can't recommend PTGUI highly enough, it's made perfect
joins on older panos that I could never get to fit with any other software.

How fiddly is it to set up? I presume you've still got the hassle of
levelling the tripod perfectly? I suppose I might buy one if I ever have the
money to spare and nothing better to spend it on (that'll be the day!)

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/