Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: image stitching  (Read 37966 times)
jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2007, 10:46:04 AM »
ReplyReply

If you're not using a proper stiching program, you're working with one arm tied behind your back. The difference in utility and output between PS CS3 beta and proper stitchers like PTAssembler, hugin, PTgui, etc. is enormous.

check out: http://tawbaware.com/maxlyons

and http://tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel/htm

...here's a pic of mine, 200 megpixel with a 350D

Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1543


WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2007, 11:23:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Stitches are an important part of how I make a living, and I charge a premium to do them. So they have to be done right. I tested PTGui (and many others) a little while back against CS3 and could find no advantage in the results. What is the basis of your statement?
« Last Edit: January 31, 2007, 11:24:06 AM by Kirk Gittings » Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 836



« Reply #22 on: January 31, 2007, 12:26:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you're not using a proper stiching program, you're working with one arm tied behind your back.


Then call me the one armed stitcher.  

 

Rich
Logged

jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2007, 01:04:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Kirk, Rich,

I appologize for the tone of my post, I ment no disrespect.

The basis of my statement is that Pano Tools type stitchers allow complete control of the transformations of each compnoent image in to the output projection, PS doesn't. And choise of output projections more than cylindrical and sort-of rectilinar. PS works very fast and well with a few images but chokes on large numbers of images.I wish PS would do better.

four handheld point and shoot images, about 11mm equiv



Photomerge



PTAssembler

Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1543


WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2007, 02:38:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for providing some examples. I see you point. For my purposes, I am usually just merging two side by side captures to extend the wide angle capabilities of my T/S lenses. Shot correctly I can get a distortion free 16 bit merge in PS3 that is flawless and is all I need.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 836



« Reply #25 on: February 01, 2007, 07:19:09 PM »
ReplyReply

jadazu,

No apology needed, I just found your remark humorous is all.

I am retired and I have plenty of time to create my photos. In other words, I am not in any kind of a rush to produce a finished product. If one picture takes me a week, I don't care. This way also tends to stimulate the gray matter, figuring ways to overcome problems manually rather than relying on the computer and software.

I am not saying there is anything at all wrong with your methods or workflow. If it works for you, then it is correct for you and I will not knock it in any way.

However it is done.......Stitch on! I enjoy the results when done well.

Rich
Logged

jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #26 on: February 01, 2007, 07:26:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Kirk, I see your point, too. Using PS is the best thing for your work. (Crossed with Rich's post)

Thanks, Rich, indeed, stich on.

PS, the layer blending option for blending stitches in the PS3 beta is a very good stitch blender!
« Last Edit: February 01, 2007, 07:37:37 PM by jadazu » Logged
Coot
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #27 on: February 08, 2007, 02:15:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Kirk: In CS3, at what point do you correct the 24TS barrel distortion, before or after stitching?
Logged
Richowens
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 836



« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2007, 02:03:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Coot,

Not to answer for Kirk, but yes you would need to remove any distortion before trying to stitch the individual images. I run each one through PTlens before I stitch them.

Rich
Logged

emilf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2007, 12:39:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I've used Panorama Factory for almost 5 years and have stitched almost 10,000 panos.  Some have well over 30 individual shots conjoined.  For me, it's about a tripod and 20-30% overlap in manual mode.
Logged
jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #30 on: February 19, 2007, 12:57:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've used Panorama Factory for almost 5 years
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't know Panorama Factory. With apologies beforehand, I wouldn't use it, based on your posted picture. The picture has large 'stitching' errors and large 'blending' errors!! (An explination those terms is; 'stitching' is the transformation and positioning of the component rectiliniar images into the chosen output projection, and 'blending' is the joining together of the images, 're-moving the seams.') The stitching errors are that the horizontal lines of the crane aren't smooth and vertical things don't 'match' and line-up, and the blending errors are that there are double images of the things that didn't stitch properly, that show up as funny 'shadows' in the final image. And the two moons...Sorry...

With a Pano Tools type of program you won't have these problems, and you can have enormous, almost total, control over the process. Check these tutorials for PTAssembler by Georges Legarde:
[a href=\"http://slash72.club.fr/gurl/MODES-PROJECTION/en_prefecture_rectiligne.htm]http://slash72.club.fr/gurl/MODES-PROJECTI..._rectiligne.htm[/url]
http://slash72.club.fr/gurl/mastering-pers...ective-rev4.htm
http://www.panorama-numerique.com/squeeze/squeeze.htm

Or ses examples at;
http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewforum.php?f=2

With apologies, again, if you're not using a proper Pano Tools type stitching program, your working with a handicap...

Re the posted picture: If you can stitch 16 bit/per/channel Tiffs, the 'banding' in the sky would go away...

And: The bumps on the horizontal lines would go away too, PTAssembler gives you the choise of the best interpolation algorithims...

Again, I don't mean to be a jerk, it's just that you can do it right... like this, for example...
http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?t=4182

PS: to Rich Owens (and others), If you're using PTLens, you're already using Pano Tools, but with a fraction of its' potentional
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 03:02:39 AM by jadazu » Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 19, 2007, 05:41:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've used Panorama Factory for almost 5 years and have stitched almost 10,000 panos.  Some have well over 30 individual shots conjoined.  For me, it's about a tripod and 20-30% overlap in manual mode.

Given the sample image, it's quite obvious the program makes no attempt whatsoever to correct for lens distortion before stitching, and there is significant ghosting where images are misaligned along the edges. The top of the tower on the left exhibits this, as well as the railing on the larger structure just left of center-frame. The railing also undulates significantly due to the uncorrected barrel distortion, making it easy to tell where the seams are even when they are lined up properly. Overall, it's an OK job for family snapshots and such, but if you are delivering this poor-quality work to paying clients, you are doing them and yourself a disservice.
Logged

jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #32 on: February 19, 2007, 12:37:04 PM »
ReplyReply

if you're using PTLens, to correct distortion before stitching, you're already using Helmut Dersch's Pano Tools, but you're using only a small fraction of it's utility. A Pano Tools type of stitching application corrects lens distortion and transforms images into the correct output projection, in one transformation.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7774



WWW
« Reply #33 on: February 19, 2007, 09:57:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've used Panorama Factory for almost 5 years and have stitched almost 10,000 panos.  Some have well over 30 individual shots conjoined.  For me, it's about a tripod and 20-30% overlap in manual mode.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101325\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have to agree with the others on this one, such a panorama could be done much better using a different piece of software.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Danijela D. Karic
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 221


« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2007, 06:30:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Kirk, Rich,

I appologize for the tone of my post, I ment no disrespect.

The basis of my statement is that Pano Tools type stitchers allow complete control of the transformations of each compnoent image in to the output projection, PS doesn't. And choise of output projections more than cylindrical and sort-of rectilinar. PS works very fast and well with a few images but chokes on large numbers of images.I wish PS would do better.

four handheld point and shoot images, about 11mm equiv



Photomerge



PTAssembler


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=98734\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I must admit, I like the way [span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']jadazu[/span] processed the files using PTAssembler better.

Regards
Danijela
Logged
jadazu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2007, 11:07:21 PM »
ReplyReply

The point I was trying ot make is about how you get to the result. You could probably get the same final, correct rectilnear result using PS Photomerge, but you'd have to; correct lens distortion> merge> correct perspective, or correct lens distortion and perspective> merge. That is, you would have to make cut-and-try attempts at a good result, correcting lens distortion and perspective by way of small proxy images with grids overlayed, re-trying being the only way to refine the results. And do two or three transformations. PT stitchers let you, for rectileaner output for example, lets you pick what should be horizontal, vertical, or straight, and then optimizes lens distortion correction, output projection, and perspective, for correct output, for all imput images all at the same time.That is; the PTAssembler result is from one step (albeit, a longer step.) And it alows you to optimize any creative perspective changes that yould like, in that same one step. For stitching 36 images into one rectilnear pic, the image I posted at the top of the page, that's a really big deal... I mostly do landscapes, and now having mercator output, for tall mosaics, would be a deal maker to me... multi-plane rectilnear I've used or a couple of architecturals too... And morph-to-fit controled morphing for the paralax problems. And to optimize different FOVs for input images, any one or more individually, for different focus settings or different zoom settings images into the same stitched image.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2007, 11:38:10 PM by jadazu » Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 23, 2007, 09:45:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Photomerge

No offense, but that looks suspiciously like a photomerge result from CS2 -- Are you saying that stitch was from CS3?  If so, which rendering intent did you use?  If you use "perspective correct" in CS3 you will get straighter lines, not as significantly bowed as you got in your photomerge example above.

I am not saying it will outperform PTAssembler, but it should do a far better job than your example shows.  

You can see my post on stitching in the digital section -- I posted larger single jpeg frames if you want to run them in PTAssembler to compare:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=14827

Cheers,
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 10:02:55 AM by Jack Flesher » Logged

francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6733


« Reply #37 on: February 23, 2007, 11:14:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
No offense, but that looks suspiciously like a photomerge result from CS2 -- Are you saying that stitch was from CS3? If so, which rendering intent did you use? If you use "perspective correct" in CS3 you will get straighter lines, not as significantly bowed as you got in your photomerge example above.
....
Jack,
I just tried to stitch the 4 little photos with Photoshop CS 3 and here's what the auto mode does (on the left). On the right, it's the version made using Photoshop CS 2.
Edit: the weird colors on the PSCS3 version are my mistake, sorry.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2007, 11:24:40 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 24, 2007, 07:11:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Jack,
I just tried to stitch the 4 little photos with Photoshop CS 3 and here's what the auto mode does (on the left). On the right, it's the version made using Photoshop CS 2.
Edit: the weird colors on the PSCS3 version are my mistake, sorry.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102625\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Now try it with "interactive" mode and check "perspective" when the assembly dialog comes up.  Should be lots straighter lines and image will "pinch" like in jadsu's example.  Also, will of course work better on the larger images.

Cheers,
« Last Edit: February 24, 2007, 07:12:10 PM by Jack Flesher » Logged

Forsh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


WWW
« Reply #39 on: February 24, 2007, 08:40:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's a 35-image pano. Only 7 across though, stitched with autopano. That software works very well.  

Hdr Panorama
« Last Edit: September 18, 2007, 10:01:08 AM by Forsh » Logged

Futenma Shrine My HDR Photography from Okinawa Japan.  | okinawa japan Other from Okinawa Japan. So what do you do? You don't want create a scene as they can call upon their members beating you down with their home made reflectors in nanoseconds, and creating an international incident over a pix of the rare Zebra butterfly is probably not a great idea.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad