Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »
 on: July 30, 2014, 07:23:58 PM 
Started by trevarthan - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Just getting started, but I intend to do more like this:

Is there a rule about what mm length is good for panos? 45mm and up? or can you use wides too?

That image may be doable with stitching, but it is a risky case because of the possible impact of wind on the trajectory of the water jets. If there is a little dispersion due to a slight breeze, then it should work. If you have irregular wind patterns, it will probably not work.

I would for sure back it up with a single shot to be sure.

Stitching can be done with any focal length, but be aware that there are limitations to the angular coverage that can be projected to a plane. Let's say it corresponds to a 12 mm non fisheye lens on FF. So if you stitch with a wide lens, let's say a 24mm, then you will only be able to do a 3-4 images stitch in vertical orientation. Beyond that you get into angular coverage that cannot be projected to a plane, which means that you will have to use a cylindrical projection that doesn't protect the linearity of elements, lines will be displayed as curves.

In other words, the longer the focal length, the more images you will be able to cover a given view angle with. The plus side is more resolution, the minus side is more time to capture, more risks if you have moving elements larger than one tile in your composition and a bit more work in post-processing.

I typically stitch with 55mm, 100mm and 180mm lenses depending on the type of scene. For your water jets, I guess that you must have used a 35mm lens for this shot? I would try it with a 50-60mm lens, probably 2 rows of 3 images. Keep the exposure relatively short, no slower than 2-4 seconds.

I would use PTGui to do this stitch. Make sure to output the result as a layered psd file so that you can edit the masks in PS to correct possible small issues.


 on: July 30, 2014, 07:23:19 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by Vladimirovich
And if Israel allowed the Palestinian people to live in decent circumstances, stopped the illegal settlement of Palestinian land & all the rest of it, maybe fewer Palestinians would feel like firing loads of largely ineffectual rockets into Israel. Like you said, there is an easy solution, but when it's a complex question, the simple answer is usually the wrong one.

Part of me is inclined to say 'a plague on both your houses', but another part simply wants people to stop killing one another. Thing is, there's no easy answer to this mess.

at least Israel could strike a separate deal with West Bank part (agree to two state, remove settlements there, etc) and and let Gaza watch West Bank - how well it could be w/o Hamas, but no... too greedy.

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:20:50 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by Vladimirovich
All Hamas has to do is stop sending rockets into Israel.
and then what ? Israel is not going to accept a two state solution, etc... stopping rockets does not stimulate occupying power

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:20:01 PM 
Started by iluvmycam - Last post by RSL
The word, "notoriety," in the original article is the correct word.

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:18:34 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by RSL
Anyway you look at it Israel is the historical agressor in Gaza.

You're living in Japan. If the South Koreans kept lobbing rockets into the area where you live, trying, by the way, to kill as many civilians as possible, and Japan finally started shooting back, would you consider Japan to be the "historical agressor?"

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:15:51 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by David Anderson
IMHO, the Palestinians should stop lobbing those useless rockets and engage a good PR firm.
They will never win in combat with Israel, but the battle for hearts & minds would be a cake walk.
The next thing they need is stable, unified government - that's the tough one.  Wink

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:15:18 PM 
Started by trevarthan - Last post by BernardLanguillier
I can't speak for Bernard but in my experience, stitching these days is really pretty easy. I've done 15 shot panos handheld...I've even done a pano of Bryce Point where I had to move the camera three times around the point with prolly 15 feet between moves (I'm talking about picking up the camera/tripod and moving the hole camera).

Yes, the better you capture the easier the stitching is gonna be. There would be an issue with long exposures and moving clouds...but a potential easy fix would be to capture the sky separately and strip it back in. It would help to know what sort of shots you are doing with these long captures.



 on: July 30, 2014, 07:11:28 PM 
Started by Isaac - Last post by RSL
3million is serious money regardless of art genre. Besides how do you make out that Gursky's isn't serious? What is serious photography anyway, does it taste different or something and should I try it?

As I said, if money is your guide to what's great you're in the wrong line of work. Try learning to paint. Gursky may be "serious," and three mil is serious money, but is Rhein II serious art? Seems to me there's the world of serious art and then there's the world of art auctions. They're two different things. As an example, check

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:10:46 PM 
Started by tsjanik - Last post by Josef Isayo
Love to see a fast F/2, 60-80mm with leaf shutter.

 on: July 30, 2014, 07:02:18 PM 
Started by rgs - Last post by Isaac
blend exposures using Exposure Fusion (not HDR) I'm not sure I'm going to get much more out of that one.

Well, you could take the exposure you have and push it in different directions and then put it back together:

- for the sky - reduce exposure, recover highlights, compress highlights, etc

- for the land - whatever

:and then put the differently processed files back together using exposure fusion (as-if they were separate exposures) or mask and layer.

Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »