Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: On Top of the World  (Read 8663 times)
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8948


« on: January 21, 2007, 01:03:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I seek advice on the following stitched image which is not lending itself well to my interpretation of the scene. As many of you know, stitched images do not always come out neat and rectangular. Preserving all the elements contained in the individual images is difficult, if not impossible.

The final cropped image below (but still subject to tonal revision) could be an average picture-postcard scene, but never mind! At least it's higher resolution than ther average postcard print.

[attachment=1579:attachment]

I'd like it to include the following elements in the foreground (100% crops) which I felt I had to crop out in deference to the conventional recangular cropping procedures.

[attachment=1581:attachment]     [attachment=1580:attachment]

As Alain Briot once wrote, all parts of the image are important. For me, the hut in the far lower left and the small group of people taking photos of each other, are an integral part of the scene. I really don't want to crop this out. So what do I do? An elliptical crop with a white background, or an elliptical crop with a black background? Or some other solution?

[attachment=1584:attachment]

Perhaps a background anecdote is called for at this point. The above scene was taken from Poon Hill close to Ghorepani in the middle of the Annapurna Range in Nepal. Ghorepani is around 2,800 metres in altitude and Poon Hill another 400 odd. So, yours truly took this shot from a height of 3200 metres. Absolutely everyone who visits Ghorepani, (makes no difference if your are 12 years old or 82), gets up at 4am to climb Poon Hill, with lights strapped around their forehead. At this time of every morning, there's a constant stream of trekkers meandering up the hill. At the top, the crowds are so great it's almost as though one had just arrived at St Peter's Square in Rome at Easter time (slight exaggeration, but you get my drift).

Now it so happens, prior to embarking upon this pre-breakfast hike, I'd had a converstaion with a young, Northern European engineering graduate, staying at the same hotel, who insisted that the famous peak, Annapurna One, 8,091 metres in height and one of the highest peaks in the area, was not visible from Poon Hill, contrary to popular belief. It was obscured by other mountains. This engineering graduate had got hold of some maps, compass another intstruments and calculated that the elevation and angles were such that Annuparna One could not possibly be seen from the top of Poon Hill.

The above panorama, I am led to believe by my experienced guide who accompanied me on this trip, includes a view of the summit of Annapurna One, behind the other peaks, as shown in the following crop. The peak on the right is Dhaulagiri, slightly higher at 8,167m. Of course, my guide could be wrong. If anyone can shed some light on this contentious issue, please speak up.

[attachment=1583:attachment]

Anyway, back to the image in question. What can I do with it? Is the unconventional crop going to work?
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 01:49:45 AM by Ray » Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7002


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2007, 03:35:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...Anyway, back to the image in question. What can I do with it? Is the unconventional crop going to work?
Ray,
I've seen many panoramic postcards with non-rectangular cropping. It doesn't bother me at all, at least on small postcard formats. Printing big is different. If you keep it with the elliptical crop, a black background might be the way to go - FWIW it's a personal opinion only.

If you're patient and want to experiment, you can always try to "paint" the missing areas in Photoshop. The clone tool and the liquify tool can be helpful. Here's my take (below, just 30 seconds in PS).

By the way, your photo is fantastic.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 03:44:35 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
Tom Perkins
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2007, 03:52:53 AM »
ReplyReply

I had a quick go using the transform and the clone tool before I saw Francois' post, this is what I came up with. If you spent some time on it nobody will ever notice. Great shot.

image
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 03:53:46 AM by Tom Perkins » Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7002


« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2007, 04:39:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
.... If you spent some time on it nobody will ever notice. Great shot. ...
Right! This photo can be easily improved and corrected for the missing areas. After more thinking, I believe that the non-rectangular crop might not be the best thing if the photo is printed poster-size and then framed.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 04:40:49 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8948


« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2007, 06:07:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Francois and Tom, thanks for your advice. Looks like I'll have to do more work on this, using the healing brush, copy and paste, whatever. The image consists of 3 hand-held shots. The leftmost image was tilted and there's no foreground in front of the shed, so I'll have to take a few patches of grass from elsewhere. I was a bit hesitant to do this because I intend making a 6ft wide print from this image and any defects will be visible. No matter how big the print is, people have a tendency to walk right up to it to examine the detail. Also, if someone asks me if the image was 'manipulated', I might find it difficult to say no   .
Logged
Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2007, 08:47:59 AM »
ReplyReply

[attachment=1586:attachment]

Here's a shot at it using transform.  This one used three separate layers - copy the right half into a layer, transform distort, then the right half of that layer, new layer transform distort and the same for the third section.  If the edge is apparent, use a gradient mask to deal with that.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8309



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2007, 10:14:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Ray,

I like what Tom and Francois have suggested. With a fair amount of time and lots of careful work you can do a clone-tool job that will not look suspicious even in a large print.

That image is well worth the effort, IMHO. You do get to some interesting places, don't you?

Eric

P.S. As an alternative, if you do the elliptical crop on the bottom, I think it would work if you do it on the top also. You should only lose some sky, of which there is plenty. Nice shot!
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 10:18:01 AM by EricM » Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2007, 11:10:38 AM »
ReplyReply

The not so good way to make a rectangular image is: In PS, Transform>Warp

The better way is to stitch the photos with a cylindrical or mercator output projection, you'll keep the bottom aproximatly horizontal in the stitch.

Jim
Logged
jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2007, 08:44:26 PM »
ReplyReply

One person who can answer your mountain peak question is Jonathan de Ferranti at;

http://www.viewfinderpanoramas.org/
« Last Edit: January 21, 2007, 08:45:39 PM by jadazu » Logged
mtselman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2007, 08:38:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Now it so happens, prior to embarking upon this pre-breakfast hike, I'd had a converstaion with a young, Northern European engineering graduate, staying at the same hotel, who insisted that the famous peak, Annapurna One, 8,091 metres in height and one of the highest peaks in the area, was not visible from Poon Hill, contrary to popular belief. It was obscured by other mountains. This engineering graduate had got hold of some maps, compass another intstruments and calculated that the elevation and angles were such that Annuparna One could not possibly be seen from the top of Poon Hill.

The above panorama, I am led to believe by my experienced guide who accompanied me on this trip, includes a view of the summit of Annapurna One, behind the other peaks, as shown in the following crop. The peak on the right is Dhaulagiri, slightly higher at 8,167m. Of course, my guide could be wrong. If anyone can shed some light on this contentious issue, please speak up.

[attachment=1583:attachment]

Anyway, back to the image in question. What can I do with it? Is the unconventional crop going to work?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ray,
The mountain your guide pointed out to you as Annapurna I is most definitely not the Annapurna and is even on the wrong side of the valley. It is most likely the Tukuche peak which is in the Dhaulagiri region.
I marked a few mountains on your photo below.
The truth is that from the whole 3-week Annapurna trek you indeed get only a couple of days when the main mountain - the Annapuran I is visible. More often you see the Annapurna South, Annapurnas II, III and IV, etc..

[attachment=1597:attachment]

To see Annapurna I in it's full beauty you need to go to the Annapurna Base Camp.
[a href=\"http://public.fotki.com/mtselman/the-trip/nepal/annapurna/pict5444.html]Annapurna I from Base Camp[/url]


 --Misha
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 08:41:52 AM by mtselman » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8948


« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2007, 10:43:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ray,
The mountain your guide pointed out to you as Annapurna I is most definitely not the Annapurna and is even on the wrong side of the valley. It is most likely the Tukuche peak which is in the Dhaulagiri region.
I marked a few mountains on your photo below.
The truth is that from the whole 3-week Annapurna trek you indeed get only a couple of days when the main mountain - the Annapuran I is visible. More often you see the Annapurna South, Annapurnas II, III and IV, etc..

[attachment=1597:attachment]

To see Annapurna I in it's full beauty you need to go to the Annapurna Base Camp.
Annapurna I from Base Camp
 --Misha
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96977\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Misha,
You might well be right, but I don't quite understand your diagram (on my photo) pointing out where Annapurna 1 should be. I've provided a 100% crop of the area you've indicated, below. Are you saying that Annapurna 1 is obscured by that whiff of cloud on the lower (appearing) peak on the left of the photo? The higher (looking) peak on the right of the crop is Machupichre, I believe; or have I got this wrong?  

[attachment=1598:attachment]
Logged
mtselman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2007, 11:34:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Misha,
You might well be right, but I don't quite understand your diagram (on my photo) pointing out where Annapurna 1 should be. I've provided a 100% crop of the area you've indicated, below. Are you saying that Annapurna 1 is obscured by that whiff of cloud on the lower (appearing) peak on the left of the photo? The higher (looking) peak on the right of the crop is Machupichre, I believe; or have I got this wrong?   

[attachment=1598:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96991\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ray, the higher, pyramid-like looking peak on the right of your photo above is Annapurna South. Machapuchare is not visible from Gorepani/Poone Hill. It is quite a bit lower than most of the mountains in the Annapurna group and is here completely obscured by Annapurna South and Hinchuli. Best views of Machapuchare are from the Annapurna Sanctuary/Base Camp trek.
As for Annapurna I, you are right, as I indicated on your photo I believe it is the mountain just barely obscured by the one you see on the left side of your photo. Some people actually say that the mountain on the left side of your photo is Annapurna I, but I do not think so. It is indeed supposed to be mostly obscured from the view.

  --Misha

PS. Most "trekking guides" in Nepal often do not know exactly which mountain is which, but as people in this culture have difficulty saying "No" to you, they would often just want to make you happy that you saw that mountain you wanted to see. You point to a mountain and ask "Is this Annapurna?"  They say: "Yes, sir." They just want to make you happy - no bad intensions. I spent almost 4 month in Nepal last year and love that land and people.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8948


« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2007, 12:42:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Most "trekking guides" in Nepal often do not know exactly which mountain is which, but as people in this culture have difficulty saying "No" to you, they would often just want to make you happy that you saw that mountain you wanted to see. You point to a mountain and ask "Is this Annapurna?" They say: "Yes, sir." They just want to make you happy - no bad intensions. I spent almost 4 month in Nepal last year and love that land and people.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97007\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Misha,
I appreciate the sentiment. Most Nepalese are struggling to survive and probably don't give a stuff about accuracy of mountain names.

However, having done a Google search, I've found the following image which is similar to my crop but clear of the clouds. The author identifies that peak (on the left of my crop) as Annapurna 1. If it's not Annapurna 1, then there's nothing in the vicinity that could be. Which means my engineering friend was right. Annapurna 1 is not visible from Poon Hill.

[attachment=1601:attachment]
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 12:45:38 PM by Ray » Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2007, 01:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's my take:

[attachment=1602:attachment]

I used the CS2 Lens Correction filter with the barrel/pincushion set to +27, no cloning/healing/painting crap needed.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2007, 01:34:48 PM by Jonathan Wienke » Logged

Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 22, 2007, 01:33:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Great tip Jonathan.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
mtselman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2007, 01:52:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Misha,
I appreciate the sentiment. Most Nepalese are struggling to survive and probably don't give a stuff about accuracy of mountain names.

However, having done a Google search, I've found the following image which is similar to my crop but clear of the clouds. The author identifies that peak (on the left of my crop) as Annapurna 1. If it's not Annapurna 1, then there's nothing in the vicinity that could be. Which means my engineering friend was right. Annapurna 1 is not visible from Poon Hill.

[attachment=1601:attachment]
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ray,
The mountain on the left is Varahashikhar (7847m), also known as the "Fang". Annapurna I is right behind it. Interestingly, Wikipedia lists it as Annapurna I: [a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapurna]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapurna[/url] , but probably due to the same reason - people come to Poon Hill and guides rather point to it and say "Annapurna I" than say: "Varahashikhar", since they know you came to see Annapurna.

  --Misha
Logged
howiesmith
Guest
« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2007, 05:11:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I seek advice on the following stitched image which is not lending itself well to my interpretation of the scene.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96811\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What is your "interpretation?"  Maybe you simply failed to "capture the moment," and no amount of pjotoshop will fetch it.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8948


« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2007, 08:46:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I used the CS2 Lens Correction filter with the barrel/pincushion set to +27, no cloning/healing/painting crap needed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97025\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Jonathan. Brilliant idea. It works just fine. Problem solved     .
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2007, 04:30:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Thanks Jonathan. Brilliant idea. It works just fine. Problem solved     .

You're welcome. Sometimes it's the simple things nobody thinks of...
Logged

jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 28, 2007, 07:44:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ray, the higher, pyramid-like looking peak on the right of your photo above is Annapurna South. Machapuchare is not visible from Gorepani/Poone Hill. It is quite a bit lower than most of the mountains in the Annapurna group and is here completely obscured by Annapurna South and Hinchuli. Best views of Machapuchare are from the Annapurna Sanctuary/Base Camp trek.
I found the view from a microflight to be more than adequate.

Spelling of the name seems to vary (Macchapucchre is the spelling I went for), but to recognize it in photos, it helps to remember that the mountain is called Fishtail Mountain.

As for the mountains themselves, and where they're at, a map is of course useful if you can point out where you were when the photograph was taken, and can identify the angle of view.

At the airport in Pokhara, they had a faded photograph of the Annapurna Range with names (note the fourth spelling of Fishtail Mountain ...):

[attachment=1678:attachment]
Logged

Jan
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad