Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Pano Heads  (Read 10706 times)
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2010, 03:24:31 PM »
ReplyReply

As a matter of interest are there tables of nodal points for popular lenses?
Logged

Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2010, 03:48:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
As a matter of interest are there tables of nodal points for popular lenses?
Look back a few posts.
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2010, 03:15:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Sorry Jeremy, missed that post. You don't happen to have one for canon by any chance?  
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3868


« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2010, 07:56:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
You don't happen to have one for canon by any chance?

Hi Ben,

It's not that hard to determine it yourself, and better yet also take the camera mounting position into account. I use a small table of settings for my lenses on my RRS setup which also incorporates the different positioning offsets between landscape and portrait orientation (due to an offset in the camera L-bracket). Just a table of camera orientation and various lenses with the displacements I need to set on the various bars using my favorite camera mounting orientation (vertical bar on the left).

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2010, 08:07:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
Sorry Jeremy, missed that post. You don't happen to have one for canon by any chance?  
Just found this ...

http://wiki.panotools.org/Entrance_Pupil_Database
Logged
Luis Argerich
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


Astrolandscaper


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2010, 12:19:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I really enjoy taking panos.
I've found that outdoors most of the panos can be taken without any problems handheld. I use the tripod only if I need it for the shutter speed.
Indoors things change as you usually have things near the camera and they appear on several frames making the stitching more difficult.

In terms of software I found PtGui pro, Hugin and PtAssembler to be ahead of AutopanoPro and the others.

Luis
Logged

Thomas Krüger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 451



WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 04, 2010, 12:35:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Martin Schweda has a collection of selfmade panorama hardware at his german/english blog: http://www.360und180.de
Logged
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 04, 2010, 09:11:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
If you're shooting indoors then I wouldn't do it without a nodal slide, you'll also need less stability than outdoors so those dual axis pano setups shouldn't be too much of a problem. Keep in mind that if you're shooting for architectural type work you want to use a longer lens for less width, you can't do a rectilinear/planar stitch (where all lines are straight) with a stitch wider than 120 degrees (14mm on FF)  personally I believe it's nearer 80 degrees (28mm on FF) then use the horizon tool in the stitching program to fix the vertical/horizontal perspective. Keep in mind that photoshop is a joke of a stitching program for when you need real control. Both Autopano Pro and PTGUI are made for doing the kind of complicated stitching needed for architecture.

Another though much more expensive solution for architecture might be to use a DSLR adaptor to LF and a digitar type lens. You will get movements, flat stitching (no need for complicated stitching programs, problems with rectiliniear angles, etc). Personally if I needed more accurate stitching for architecture (commercial level) that is the solution I'd be using, a cambo or something with a high megapixel, decently implemented LV camera. A cheaper solution would be to use a t/s lens but then you don't get that much stitch and by the time you've straightened perspective in PS you've lost any resolution advantage.

Question to those using nodal slides, are you using primes? Seems to me that working out the nodal point for all focal lengths of a zoom would be a royal pain in the neck. I use a zoom without nodal but I'm not shooting indoors where it matters.

I made a youtube video a while back showing how to shoot pano's without being crippled with the 'keep horizon in centre' nonsense, another widely held pano myth. I deleted it but if I can find it I'll put it back up and link to it.


Thanks for this information - I looked at the video and it did a fine job of explaining. I truly appreciate the effort to post and link that!

This weekend I hope to get some time to work out the details for making a pano head similar to what BillT illustrated. It sounds as if once the details are worked out the assembly itself is fairly straight forward. I contacted my buddy with a wood shop and he said he’s game to do wood working.

I also saw a used pano head at a local retail store. Didn’t write down the manufacturer. It appears very ruggedly built but is a fairly heavy contraption. Based on weight I'm guessing it was made for MF. They only want $350 for it and the sales guy was hinting at discounts.

Haven’t tried multi row panos as PS didn’t provide a way of doing it, but can see it’s vital for interior shots.
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 04, 2010, 09:15:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Indeed it would ... fortunately some folks have done the work and shared ...

I wish I remembered where I found this ... but I don't ... enjoy!!

http://photography.jeremypayne.net/web/entrance%20pupils.xls

Thanks! These charts take a lot of the work out of the process!
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 04, 2010, 09:18:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ThomasK
Martin Schweda has a collection of selfmade panorama hardware at his german/english blog: http://www.360und180.de

I dunno if it's just me but every time i open the site, after a few seconds it redirects my browser. Anyone else experience this?
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2010, 09:20:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
I use Autopano Pro and find it far better than PTGUI for negating the need for all these expensive and not particularly stable gadgets. People love to make life difficult for themselves...

I looked at the Autopano Pro site and have a question about this and similar products. While I understand this is far advanced of what PS does for panos, does this replace PS entirely or is it used in addition to?

And related, to above I'm not at all certain about work flow when doing panos. So far I've done minimal workup in RAW and then open in PS to merge and complete. The question is: Do people do the workup on raw files, then convert & stitch? Or???


Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 04, 2010, 09:22:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Luis Argerich
I really enjoy taking panos....

In terms of software I found PtGui pro, Hugin and PtAssembler to be ahead of AutopanoPro and the others.

Luis


How do they differ? How does one come to make an educated decision without trying all the top contenders??
« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 09:23:00 AM by Justan » Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3868


« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2010, 11:47:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Justan
How do they differ? How does one come to make an educated decision without trying all the top contenders??

By trying them all

No, just kidding, but nevertheless with a serious undertone. Seriously, Hugin and PTAssembler are not expensive (in fact Hugin is free). PTAssembler is Windows only, unless you run Parallels on a Mac I suppose. So start there and then with the knowledge about that look at what others have to say about e.g. PTGui (and remember, people tend to defend their own choices, not necessarily the best product ...).

They all have different benefits and weaker points, and it depends on you particular needs which one serves your needs best. Actually many people end up by using several of them, whatever the particular need and easy workflow dictates.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2010, 02:44:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Justan, you can make a pano from raw file to finished cropped HDR image in a pano program. I wouldn't advise it though. I process the RAW files using ACR for max DR, etc. I export 16 bit TIFF's and load those into Autopanopro. I make the pano and save. I then take the finished pano back into ACR, crop and do as much work as possible before sending to photoshop for layers, etc. Because all the basic work is done in ACR I usually manage to finish an image with only 4-6 layers, half of which is just the B&W conversion, etc.

This photo was incredibly hard to process for, it was too wide an angle for the rectilinear pano I made from it. I did it in autopanopro and ptgui. Ptgui gave a less distorted result, slightly, but the finished file, from 7 frames, was only 11 megapixels. The Autopano image was 35 megapixels and I fixed the worst of the distortion in PS.

In other words, download a trial of both, try it on a good trial pano, see which one floats your boat.



Interesting picture, 5am, field stripped the cable release with my teeth and spliced it, it worked and I'm useless at DIY stuff.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 02:53:19 PM by Ben Rubinstein » Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 11, 2010, 12:51:58 PM »
ReplyReply

A slightly belated but sincere thanks for the feedback on this! It is good to know that the “standout” in the field of stitching software is PS due to being about the worst of the bunch - and that the tools offer a variety of solutions rather than competitive solutions.

I will schedule some time to test the main contenders.

Ben, I thought about the photo (above) over several days. It really is a very nice one. I was at first troubled by the satellite dish because I thought it incongruous with the rest of the scene. After some deliberation I concluded that it fits well and makes for a harmonic of sorts of the rest of the image. While it does stand out, it ultimately serves the image in much the same way that the building portal exists where it appears there was once a chimney. The photo is a lot about change on different levels, and illustrates some change is more subtle than others.

Again, very nicely done – not even addressing the issues related to doing it as a stitch!
« Last Edit: February 11, 2010, 12:53:23 PM by Justan » Logged

Panopeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1805


« Reply #35 on: February 11, 2010, 01:52:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ben Rubinstein
This photo was incredibly hard to process for, it was too wide an angle for the rectilinear pano I made from it. I did it in autopanopro and ptgui. Ptgui gave a less distorted result, slightly, but the finished file, from 7 frames, was only 11 megapixels. The Autopano image was 35 megapixels and I fixed the worst of the distortion in PS
I don't understand this problem. I tried PTGui for years ago for a short time, but it was in its beginning phase and I dropped it, and I have been using PTAssembler in the meantime. However, they both are based on Panorama Tools, thus PTGui too should offer you to specify the output size. The time the "stitcher" spends on warping will be much longer, of course, as will the blending be, but that should be natural.
Logged

Gabor
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad