Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 295 5d images stiched to a 360° pano  (Read 10206 times)
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« on: October 22, 2007, 12:40:43 PM »
ReplyReply

original size is 51644 x 25822

UPDATE: Now I have my own domain and uploaded a full screen zoomify version so that you can view the full resolution http://photoartkalmar.com/Photoart%20Kalma...ixel/index.html
And here you can visite my new homepage http://photoartkalmar.com/


« Last Edit: December 17, 2007, 08:31:56 AM by julian kalmar » Logged
mahleu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2007, 01:00:54 PM »
ReplyReply

That must have taken a while. Nice result.
Logged

______________________________________________________________________
Anyone selling a 1DSIII or 6D cheap?
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2007, 04:00:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Impressive!  If you don't mind my asking, how did you manage to get enough computer memory to stitch it all?  (What sort of machine, how much memory, etc.?)

Gorgeous church, too.  If I'm ever in Vienna, I'll definitely put it on my list of places to see.

Lisa
Logged

fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2007, 08:55:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Very nice.  What lens did you use?  295 images in such a small space, must've used a pretty long lens.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 09:06:01 AM by fike » Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Giedo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 193


« Reply #4 on: October 23, 2007, 03:18:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm impressed too!
Can you tell a bit more about the process, lens used, which ISO (image looks very clean), software, etc?

Keep doing this!
Kind regards, Giedo
Logged

Giedo
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2007, 02:04:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: nniko,Oct 22 2007, 11:00 PM

It seems that Ram is not so important for the stich itselfe. I opend the taskmanager during stiching but PTGui never used more then 1GB from my 4 GB but you need much free disc space ( more then 150GB. I have a 2,66 dual core with 4GB Ram and a 8800GTX graphic card with 768MB tRam
« Last Edit: October 24, 2007, 02:07:22 AM by julian kalmar » Logged
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #6 on: October 24, 2007, 02:08:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Very nice.  What lens did you use?  295 images in such a small space, must've used a pretty long lens.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148096\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I uused a Canon 24-70mm 2,8 at 70mm
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8390



WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 24, 2007, 05:13:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Impressive technical achievement at capture time, but, at the risk of looking a bit harsh, I don't find the current projection/crop aesthetically pleasing.

I would either get rid of the ceiling and some of the foreground by cropping, or try other projections that preserve better the shape of the ceiling.

Good luck.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 24, 2007, 08:02:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Impressive technical achievement at capture time, but, at the risk of looking a bit harsh, I don't find the current projection/crop aesthetically pleasing.

I would either get rid of the ceiling and some of the foreground by cropping, or try other projections that preserve better the shape of the ceiling.

Good luck.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148320\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is indeed an impressive technical achievement, but I agree that the projection seems more novel than truly artistic.  I have been doing a great deal of panoramic work (my largest is 65 images) and I tend to like the projection NOT to be evident in the image.  As a result, I typically use cylindrical projections that seem to have a bit less distortion, but when using them, you can't go more than 180 degrees.  This 360 is very cool!  All 360 panos look peculiar though.  I would love to see a high resolution panoramic of the ceiling in that room.  That would be absolutely stunning.

Exposure and focus are spot-on.  This image can easily be printed 5' tall.  That is extremely cool.  A problem I have with many of my panos is that when they are presented online, they lose their allure because the detail can't possibly come through.  I think if this were printed 5 feet tall by 10 feet wide, it would hard not to be in awe of the accomplishment.  

Great Work!  Now the challenge of printing begins. Where is your epson 11880?
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
sergio
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 24, 2007, 10:53:15 AM »
ReplyReply

I happen to have the same feeling with projections. I try not to shoot wider than 180 deg because it starts to look funny. What really bothers of huge panos is that I cannot print them because storing them appropiately is a hassle and you can't roll them for a long time. I don't have any more spare walls where to hang them. When I make an exhibition they do sell well. Peolple have to see them to appreciate them fully. Showing the hi res file in a screen won't cut it.

RAM itself is not so important. Processor is, and especially lots of free hard drive space.
Logged

julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2007, 01:21:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm impressed too!
Can you tell a bit more about the process, lens used, which ISO (image looks very clean), software, etc?

Keep doing this!
Kind regards, Giedo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148189\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I made the single images with a selfbuild pano head and for stiching I used PTGui.
The most important thing is to make every image with too less DOF with different focusing points and put them together BEFORE the stich.
(I `m using CombineZM for this)
Alsow the exposure has been a problem.
Normaly you should use the same exposure for all images which wasn`t possible
 in this case, so I made many images with 2 to 4 different exposures and put them together in PS BEFORE the stich.
The WB was a problem too because of the mixture of daylight and tungston.
You can only handle this with RAW files.
And of course the stiched image had many little mistakes because of different focusing points, so I had to edit the stiched image manually in PS, which was the most time intensive thing in making this image.
exposure was between 5sec and 1/60 at F11/iso100
Taking all images took me 2 hours, my computer took another 14 hours putting the puzzle together.
Editing the single images to get everything sharp and without visible exposure and color jumps before the stich took about one week. And on the final image I had to work another 4 weeks.
100% crop without different focusing points


100% crop of the final image with multifocus


other 100% crop


« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 02:48:58 AM by julian kalmar » Logged
seberri
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 26, 2007, 05:47:35 AM »
ReplyReply

well done

do you know :
> 1000  photos
Logged
condit79
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2007, 03:54:39 PM »
ReplyReply

If you would have simply lowered your vantage point and gotten more cieling in it would be more than a technical excersise.  The perspective is a bit wonky.  Technically well done and an interesting adventure I'm sure.
Logged
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2007, 09:23:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you would have simply lowered your vantage point and gotten more cieling in it would be more than a technical excersise.  The perspective is a bit wonky.  Technically well done and an interesting adventure I'm sure.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=151155\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Lowering the vantage point would`t give you more cieling and changing the projection´s midpoint would result in funny looking lines of the wall. The perspective is always wonky in a 360° image.
Have you ever make a 360°/180° full spherical pano??
Don`t missunderstand me, I love good critiques and the cieling is always a problem in such images but talking about a lower vantage point and wonky perspective  in a full spherical pano is like talking about colors in a B/W image
« Last Edit: November 09, 2007, 10:51:29 AM by julian kalmar » Logged
Scott McGee
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 49



WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 13, 2007, 10:53:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...
...
A problem I have with many of my panos is that when they are presented online, they lose their allure because the detail can't possibly come through.
...

[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I used to have that problem also. Panos posted on my website just couldn't show all the great detail in them. BUT, there's always a solution, and for me the solution was Photoshop CS3. It has a new feature that lets you export a high-res photo to a Flash format that allows the viewer to zoom in and pan around. Highly recommended!

Here are a few examples:

[a href=\"http://alaskaphotos.biz/00-106-31-36.htm]http://alaskaphotos.biz/00-106-31-36.htm[/url]
http://alaskaphotos.biz/1ds-01-3207-15.htm
http://alaskaphotos.biz/00-050-22-24.htm


Scott
http://www.alaskaphotos.biz
Logged


Scott McGee
AlaskaPhotos
The true and lasting value of Nature lies in its ability to inspire and revitalize the soul.
panoak
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2007, 11:07:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Lowering the vantage point would`t give you more cieling and changing the projection´s midpoint would result in funny looking lines of the wall. The perspective is always wonky in a 360° image.
Have you ever make a 360°/180° full spherical pano??
Don`t missunderstand me, I love good critiques and the cieling is always a problem in such images but talking about a lower vantage point and wonky perspective  in a full spherical pano is like talking about colors in a B/W image
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yours is an amazing study in the single-minded pursuit of "only this".  There are so many nuances and challenges that it could only be understood and appreciated by one who was trying to do very similar things.  Kudos to you, sir, as you have far more dedication than I.
     You say that you used a self made pano head.  It would be interesting to see what you did in this regard, as I have made my own rather complex range of pano heads, which resulted in this: [a href=\"http://www.procabbie.com/html/fifthpano.html]http://www.procabbie.com/html/fifthpano.html[/url]  Your perspective interests me, because you are obviously looking inside, while I am obviously looking outside.  Would the same device serve in both situations?  I think so.  If you see anything in my design that would better serve you, please use it.  I would like to see yours, because maybe I'm not finished with building these things.  If there is something different that either of us are doing, it would be interesting to see...
Logged
tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2007, 04:36:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Excellent - thanks so much for sharing, I might bring out my pano head again
is this a multi row stitch?

Henrik
Logged
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #17 on: November 16, 2007, 08:35:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yours is an amazing study in the single-minded pursuit of "only this".  There are so many nuances and challenges that it could only be understood and appreciated by one who was trying to do very similar things.  Kudos to you, sir, as you have far more dedication than I.
     You say that you used a self made pano head.  It would be interesting to see what you did in this regard, as I have made my own rather complex range of pano heads, which resulted in this: http://www.procabbie.com/html/fifthpano.html  Your perspective interests me, because you are obviously looking inside, while I am obviously looking outside.  Would the same device serve in both situations?  I think so.  If you see anything in my design that would better serve you, please use it.  I would like to see yours, because maybe I'm not finished with building these things.  If there is something different that either of us are doing, it would be interesting to see...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152624\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wow!!!
Your monster is looking really phantastic. Mine must look like a mosquito near yours.
I can use my panohead only indoor because it is very light weighted. Unfortunately I do not have so much time to designe a monster like yours but it really looks wonderful. I attached a picture of my head
Logged
julian kalmar
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2007, 04:41:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Here you can see a fuul screen java pano
http://www.panoguide.com/gallery/503/view_...&h=1570&fs=true
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 04:42:23 PM by julian kalmar » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad