Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hiding Seams in a Panoramic Stitch  (Read 4116 times)
garyhill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31



WWW
« on: June 24, 2013, 08:54:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I am in need of some advice on how to hide some seams in a panoramic stitch. The attached file shows my problem. Most of the seams are okay but the two seams in the water to the left of the image are quite visible. I have tried using the clone stamp with a soft edge and dialling down the opacity but the results are very average. I have also tried the healing brush tool, patch tool, content aware fill but none seem to work all that well.

Any suggestions on techniques / settings to use would be most welcome.

Cheers,

Gary

Landscape Photography by Gary Hill
www.nghill.net/garyhill
Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2013, 10:33:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Panos of water can be painful to finish for the reasons illustrated very well by your gorgeous capture.

What I do is to add layers and use them to copy and move as much of nearby waves and other water textures as needed so that the distractions are gone. Sometimes I go back to the original pre-stitched images for source content and sometimes I use parts of the stitched composition, or both. After the seams are hidden I fix up colors and shading as needed.

Another approach is to use a very long shutter speed for the captures as that blurs the water and helps to reduce the need for this kind of pp.

Here’s an example. IIRC there are 7 frames taken of water and 3 of land.

Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3867


« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2013, 10:51:41 AM »
ReplyReply

I am in need of some advice on how to hide some seams in a panoramic stitch. The attached file shows my problem. Most of the seams are okay but the two seams in the water to the left of the image are quite visible. I have tried using the clone stamp with a soft edge and dialling down the opacity but the results are very average. I have also tried the healing brush tool, patch tool, content aware fill but none seem to work all that well.

Any suggestions on techniques / settings to use would be most welcome.

Hi Gary,

I assume you have the individual tiles in multiple layers in Photoshop? If so, how much overlap do you have at the problem area?

Have you tried putting the top layer in Difference blending mode? That should show perfect alignment as black, and poor alignment as lighter. You then in a first attempt draw a seam in the mask of the upper layer along a path that is as dark as possible, and select one side to fill the mask with black to hide and the other side white to reveal. You can then locally add a bit of blur to the seam.

If there are still discontinuities, because the surf crest is at different positions, you can then try and repair that by local warping with e.g. the Puppet Warp tool.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
garyhill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31



WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2013, 05:23:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Justan/Bart thank you for the replys.

I concur about using longer shutter speeds. This is about my 4th or 5th attempt at a panorama at this spot. My first few attempts were with a shutter speed of 1 to 2 seconds and the seams were awful. The shutter speed for these images was about 15 sec and is the best stitch I have so far.

I am using PTGUI for stitiching so I can generate a multiple layer file in Photoshop and there is quite a bit of overlap to work with.

I will try both suggestions and see how I go. Thank you again.

Cheers,

Gary

Landscape Photography by Gary Hill
www.nghill.net/garyhill
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8344



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2013, 06:51:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Autopano pro/ giga usually does a much better job in such situations.

Now, the real trick is to time captured better, but even that rarely works perfectly. :-)

Long exposures obviously always work, but that is a very different look.

If such images are important to you then nothings beats a 6x17 film camera + drum/Imacon scan. Less detail/more grain but perfect results garanteed!

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Jim Kasson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1036



WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2013, 07:07:28 PM »
ReplyReply

If such images are important to you then nothings beats a 6x17 film camera + drum/Imacon scan. Less detail/more grain but perfect results guaranteed!

Or a Betterlight back and the pano turntable...

Jim
Logged

framah
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1222



« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2013, 02:02:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Or a Betterlight back and the pano turntable...

Jim

Except that it will compress the waves or extend them depending on which way the scan is moving.

I'm still waiting for a week off so I can go play with mine. Cheesy
Logged

"It took a  lifetime of suffering and personal sacrifice to develop my keen aesthetic sense."
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2013, 11:03:50 AM »
ReplyReply


If there are still discontinuities, because the surf crest is at different positions, you can then try and repair that by local warping with e.g. the Puppet Warp tool.

Cheers,
Bart

I haven't played with the puppet warp tool much but will give this a try in the near future. Cool tip!
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2959


« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2013, 12:04:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I seem to recall reading about someones experiment with 3 P&S cameras to take 3 simultaneous overlapping images for stitching.
Logged
garyhill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31



WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 27, 2013, 05:51:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for everybodys comments and suggestions. As for a Betterlight back or 17x6 film camera, what can I say but, so many options, so little money, so little time!

Attached is my final version which I am reasonably happy with. Final proof as always will be a large print to see if it holds up to close scrutiny.

Cheers,

Gary

Landscape Photography by Gary Hill
www.nghill.net/garyhill
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3867


« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2013, 01:49:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for everybodys comments and suggestions. As for a Betterlight back or 17x6 film camera, what can I say but, so many options, so little money, so little time!

Attached is my final version which I am reasonably happy with. Final proof as always will be a large print to see if it holds up to close scrutiny.

Hi Gary,

It looks fine at this magnification. The Cylindrical projection works good in this case, even if it warps the shore line.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad