Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Require 12 ft print, digital or 8x10 film?  (Read 9546 times)
Harold Clark
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« on: October 05, 2010, 06:24:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print. I have often stitched a few frames from my Canons ( 16 & 21MP ) but nothing near the number that would be required for this amount of resolution. Any advice from the multi frame stitchers out there? I could also shoot 8x10 film. I don't have any MF digital equipment.
Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2010, 06:28:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Aha.

You need Yair's whizzy new back.

J
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3572


« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2010, 06:50:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print.

Hi Harold,

What's the angle of view you need to cover? How high is the print going to be? What kind of output/presentation is it going to be (LF Inkjet / Lambda / back illumination)? What kind of detail is required, IOW what's the viewing distance?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2010, 07:24:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Seitz Roundshot (160 MP) was made for this.

http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d925/f934.cfm
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7885



WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2010, 07:42:37 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an assignment to photograph a bridge at dusk which will require final output of a 12 ft ( 4 meter ) long print. I have often stitched a few frames from my Canons ( 16 & 21MP ) but nothing near the number that would be required for this amount of resolution. Any advice from the multi frame stitchers out there? I could also shoot 8x10 film. I don't have any MF digital equipment.

Stitching can handle this without any problem.

I have many 2 meters wide shots that scream with detail and could be printed twice larger without any significant quality loss, even with your eye one inch away from the print.

You need to get to about 35.000 or 40.000 mega pixels width which will require about 15 images in vertical orientation. I recommend shooting at ISO 400 and large enough aperture (f5.6) or so if your camera allows it to shorten the exposure time so as to avoid too much sky darkening over the time of exposure from side to side.

cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: October 05, 2010, 07:51:02 AM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2010, 07:48:15 AM »
ReplyReply

This spring I had a job to make an image that was going to be printed 8'x12' at 150 dpi.  Even with my P65+ it took 14 panels to create the final image.  I used two rows with the back in vertical orientation, shifting up and down on the camera for vertical displacement and then panning every 10 degrees or so for the horizontal movement.

Looking back, I think I'd prefer to drum scan neg than try to stitch that many images again.

A little more info on my experience...

Cheers,
CB
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3572


« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2010, 08:08:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Looking back, I think I'd prefer to drum scan neg than try to stitch that many images again.

I wouldn't. A good drumscan is rare to be found. When done well, the stitch will be of higher quality, and the computer doesn't require handholding while it's calculating (let it calculate when you sleep). That does presume one has some experience with stitching, and the subject lends itself to that approach, and the right precautions were taken.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Dennis Carbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2010, 08:52:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I'd go with the 8 x 10 and drum scan by west coast imaging, properly done i think it would be better than a stitch from a dslr, too many panels required for a true dusk shot and you only have a few minutes of "Magic Time" .  I stitch on a daily basis, and yes it would produce a fantastic image - I just think if you already have an 8 x 10 and know how to use it it is far better for this particular job.  just My opinion  Grin
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2010, 09:14:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.

Sample from the Seitz site:

Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Dennis Carbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2010, 09:26:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I do agree that the Seitz would be a really cool choice, IF you can rent one.  (TY for that info Graham - I had never seen one before). OP said he already had an 8 x 10 and Canon DSLR'S ...I was just thinking between the two I would shoot film in this case.
Logged
JonathanBenoit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 414


WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2010, 09:29:53 AM »
ReplyReply

I havent heard of anyone renting the seitz in the US. If anyone does, please let me know.
Logged

BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2010, 10:01:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I havent heard of anyone renting the seitz in the US. If anyone does, please let me know.

I would ask Fotocare in NYC 212.741.2990  Donald or Fred
I've seen Seitz cameras there at times.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2010, 10:13:45 AM by BJNY » Logged

Guillermo
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2010, 03:30:32 PM »
ReplyReply

This spring I had a job to make an image that was going to be printed 8'x12' at 150 dpi.  Even with my P65+ it took 14 panels to create the final image.  I used two rows with the back in vertical orientation, shifting up and down on the camera for vertical displacement and then panning every 10 degrees or so for the horizontal movement.
CB
I would have thought that 14 * 65Mpx would have been a reasonable minimum - I would have gone for 180 original camera pixels per print inch for an Epson printer.

Pan-and-stitch is not Ideal for architecture... but with digital lenses you would not have the image circle to shift-and-stitch that many images, and if you used LF lenses you might need to quadruple the sensor area due to the lower res of the lens, so CB's pan-and-shift was a good compromise.

¿Where are you?

Another option is the virtual viewpoint technique/theory, which involves photographing the building/bridge/subject in sections (moving the camera between shots (or columns of shots)), but using shift to get the parallax right, as if the photo was taken from one point (the virtual viewpoint). This would be difficult if all the pictures had to be taken within a few minutes.

¿15 65Mpx cameras? ( I have thought that, to photograph a train. it would be nice to use the virtual viewpoint technique with 3 Sinars.)
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7885



WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2010, 07:27:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Why shoot film? The Seitz has a capture time of 1 second and 11 bits of dynamic range (you'd have to ask how many frames per minute it can handle but I bet it's a lot more than 8x10 film!) No worrying about whether you have the shot, no scanning issues, etc. I'd definitely try to rent one.

Has the Seitz image quality been improved? The 100% samples we were shown one year ago were poor in terms of noise.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2010, 07:51:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Seems perfectly acceptable to me

http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d925/f1002.cfm
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
DanielStone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 552


« Reply #15 on: October 05, 2010, 09:56:25 PM »
ReplyReply

shoot the 8x10 on 160nc, or E100G. you'll have detail coming out your ears Smiley

forget west coast imaging, send the film to Lenny eiger. 

http://www.eigerphoto.com/pricing_policy_ep.php

he's the man when it comes to doing drum scans RIGHT!

not cheap, but that's when you build the cost of scans into the budget from the get-go.

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

Posts: 1547


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 05, 2010, 10:45:47 PM »
ReplyReply

I second the vote for Lenny Eiger. He does superb work.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
adammork
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2010, 12:15:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Another option is the virtual viewpoint technique/theory, which involves photographing the building/bridge/subject in sections (moving the camera between shots (or columns of shots)), but using shift to get the parallax right, as if the photo was taken from one point (the virtual viewpoint). This would be difficult if all the pictures had to be taken within a few minutes.

¿15 65Mpx cameras? ( I have thought that, to photograph a train. it would be nice to use the virtual viewpoint technique with 3 Sinars.)


Dear Dick,

I have lost counts on how many times you have sugested the "vitual viewpoint technique" as an valid solution to a tecnical challenge. Could you please go out and try the theory in real life before you surgest it next time to someone in here - please try it with a 3d object, like a brigde or a building, not a flat wall.
 
I can tell you from experience through my daily work, that if you move the lens, you will cretate a new perpective of the object, so you will end up with a series of images, each with there own unique perspective. No amount of shift is going to change that.....

/adam  
Logged

Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2010, 04:28:57 AM »
ReplyReply


Dear Dick,

I have lost counts on how many times you have sugested the "vitual viewpoint technique" as an valid solution to a tecnical challenge. Could you please go out and try the theory in real life before you surgest it next time to someone in here - please try it with a 3d object, like a brigde or a building, not a flat wall.
 
I can tell you from experience through my daily work, that if you move the lens, you will cretate a new perpective of the object, so you will end up with a series of images, each with there own unique perspective. No amount of shift is going to change that.....

/adam  
I am waiting for a sliding back I bought on eBay, and this should enable me to do this (my Silvestri back is not worth using, as it does not focus, and the digiback falls out).

Viewpoint is perspective, they say, so if a series of photos has the same (virtual) viewpoint, they should all have similar perspective... but where you want to join the pictures the perspective/parallax would be different.

The way round the perspective problem is to join the pictures in flat areas of the subject... this would be very easy to do on a typical building with rows of windows, and, as you suggest, the technique would not work for complex 3D scenes where you could not join pictures on flat surfaces.

... and old buildings with inset windows, bay windows, porches etc. are not totally flat.

... many stone arch bridges would also be easy, as the pictures can be joined between the arches.

I appreciate that the technique would not work for a typical landscape... but I want to take pictures or harbours, and at Swanage and Port Isaac there are roads on which I could join the pictures ( I am thinking of using pan-and-stitch for some sections of the pictures, and shift-and -stitch and/or virtual viewpoint for others).

Most rural stone brides would be relatively easy, as they have flat areas between the arches.

The "real world" Seitz sample picture in this topic would be difficult or impossible...

You would have to be in the river to take the pictures

There are not large flat areas between the arches

The building in the background (The UK Houses of Parliament, or Palace of Westminster) would be at a larger scale than in a picture taken from the virtual viewpoint, so a simple join between the arches of the bridge would mean that you would loose some bits of the building, or do a complicated stitch, re-scale and re-combine operation which might work, but would be a PITA.

There is nothing miraculous about the technique, and it may well not be suitable or possible for the bridge project that is the subject of this topic (access tends to be a problem for bridges)... but, for a typical wide building in a narrow street I think it would work.
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
adammork
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #19 on: October 06, 2010, 04:54:08 AM »
ReplyReply

The way round the perspective problem is to join the pictures in flat areas of the subject... this would be very easy to do on a typical building with rows of windows, and, as you suggest, the technique would not work for complex 3D scenes where you could not join pictures on flat surfaces.

when you try your technique for real, I think you will discover that the real world is a complex 3D scene.... maybe the stone bridge looks flat, but I can tell you, that the for- and back ground is not flat, what you see between the arches have perspective for sure - and a even flat looking building in a narrow street is part of a complex 3D scene, like it or not - give it a try, looking forward to see the result  Wink
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad