Fixing banding in pano prints!

[aRJun]

Heya All,

I've been doing panos for a year now (not all the time, but every other opp I can get!)..started with a cheap opteka pan head, then moved on to the bogen 488 rc2 ballhead and now finally I have the Panosaurus.

Recently I had the courage to print a 12" by 36" of a skyline panoramic shot of mine. To my dismay when good light falls on the print, I can see banding in the sky.

My tools for post-production:

1. PC laptop (uncalibrated)
2. Photoshop for RAW conversion to 16 bit TIFF
3. Hugin + Enblend for stitching and blending.

When I saw the stitched tiff on my laptop screen, I just couldn't see any banding and I felt Enblend had done a fine job. I still can't see any banding!

I don't know how to go about fixing this but I have a few steps in mind:

1. Get to see the banding on screen so I can fix it! Can't fix what I cannot see :(
2. Once I can see the banding, get around to fixing them on screen and then trying another 12" by 36" print.

Can anyone help me out here? I'm ready to invest in a good lcd monitor and calibrate it IF it will definitely help.

Panos are my absolutely fav hobby...so if anyone who's been through this can please help me out.

Thanks in advance,
aRJun

[Raphael Emond]

Try downloading Autostitch and give it a try... nive little program that can stitch nearly everything...

[Moppie]

Can't help with the processing, but with regards to getting a monitor I would be inclined to get a CRT rather than an LCD.
Unless you are happy to spend lots of money the vast majority of LCDs still have problems with tonal gradations and banding. They simply won't display them accurately.
Even something like a 19inch dell ultrasharp, which is a VERY good LCD, will still have problems. It might show you 90% of what you miss on your laptop, but its those few little details that it misses that will still ruin a print.

A second hand 19inch CRT (try and get a Sony Trinitron) will not only be cheaper, but will show you banding that an LCD can not display.

[Raphael Emond]

CRT vs LCD accuracy is a dead topic. It was proved that good LCD have a wider gamut of color than CRT and not more banding than a CRT.

You only have to choose a good LCD capable of displaying 16bit color. Cheap LCD are only 12bit so you can have banding with those. Keep away from TN matrix

[Moppie]

You only have to choose a good LCD capable of displaying 16bit color.


Iv seen banding on a 16bit LCD :rolleyes:.

Yes there are LCD's that are as good as, or better than CRT's, but the cost is still bery prohibative. You must have missed the opening line of the second sentance in my post :rolleyes:

As you said, its a topic thats been done to death here, and on other forums :)

[aRJun]

CRT vs LCD accuracy is a dead topic. It was proved that good LCD have a wider gamut of color than CRT and not more banding than a CRT.

You only have to choose a good LCD capable of displaying 16bit color. Cheap LCD are only 12bit so you can have banding with those. Keep away from TN matrix

So a good LCD (say an apple cinema display) will really help me see these bandings, right?

[cosworth]

Back to the OP...

Is this banding vertical or horizontal?

Are you shooting your panos in M mode with no polarizer?

[cctsm]

Well, I can recommend Eizo monitors - really good color reproduction compared to a lot of the gunk out there.

Also, you want a 24/32 (32-bit monitors don't exist, really - the remaining 8 bits are alpha which it can't display), not one of the cheapo 16/18-bit LCDs. A lot of the cheap ones are 18 bits, as 16-bit panels would be distinctly silly to drive (5/6/5 vs 6/6/6).

As for the banding; was the original image RAW/16-bit color space, or 8-bit? Banding can happen at awkward moments with 8-bit files, so if you can go with 16 bits for as long as possible, that's a distinct advantage.

[rammy]

Back to the OP...

Are you shooting your panos in M mode with no polarizer?

Following up from Jason's comments. You should not have to fix banding. If done correctly, with settings that do not alter, in a decent amount of time and no filters, you should get panos with no banding at all.

Can you explain your settings that you use please? I would take them with thus in mind:

- No filters
- White balance preset to sunny or cloudy (NO AWB)
- Focus set to manual
- Camera mode set to M - Manual only.
- Aperture preset
- Shutter speed preset
- ISO set to lowest
- Use tripod
- Shoot as quick as you can, left to right. Even a relatively slowish pano technique done when the sun is just rising or setting can cause banding.

[aRJun]

Following up from Jason's comments. You should not have to fix banding. If done correctly, with settings that do not alter, in a decent amount of time and no filters, you should get panos with no banding at all.

Can you explain your settings that you use please? I would take them with thus in mind:

- No filters
- White balance preset to sunny or cloudy (NO AWB)
- Focus set to manual
- Camera mode set to M - Manual only.
- Aperture preset
- Shutter speed preset
- ISO set to lowest
- Use tripod
- Shoot as quick as you can, left to right. Even a relatively slowish pano technique done when the sun is just rising or setting can cause banding.

All those settings applied to my pano. No filters, Tungsten WB, Focus manual, Camera Mode - M (aperture and shutter speed constant throughout), ISO 100, Tripod.

It's a vertical pano and I see banding in the sky. It was just after sunset and yes I agree the exposure varied fast. So maybe I was slow on this.

But you see I'm not asking how to not get banding the next time around. I have a very memorable photo (probably I'll never get to shooting it under the same circumstances again) and I want to fix things but I can't until I can see it on my screen on any software!

That's exactly what I want to know. Since I don't have a calibrated monitor, those with one can tell me if they can see a banding in this part of the actual image:

http://arjun.smugmug.com/photos/151216587-O.jpg

It's too big to post here.

So please if you can find banding in your monitors, could you please help me out by making marks on this.

Many many thanks guys,
aRJun

[aRJun]

Well, I can recommend Eizo monitors - really good color reproduction compared to a lot of the gunk out there.

Also, you want a 24/32 (32-bit monitors don't exist, really - the remaining 8 bits are alpha which it can't display), not one of the cheapo 16/18-bit LCDs. A lot of the cheap ones are 18 bits, as 16-bit panels would be distinctly silly to drive (5/6/5 vs 6/6/6).


Hmm I was thinking more on the lines of an Apple cinema display. Is that a good idea?

As for the banding; was the original image RAW/16-bit color space, or 8-bit?
The RAWs were 16 bit color space.

Banding can happen at awkward moments with 8-bit files, so if you can go with 16 bits for as long as possible, that's a distinct advantage.

Actually I should think the opposite since in 8 bit color space, it wouldn't distinguish similar shades so much as 16 bit and therefore the banding wouldn't show in 8 bit. This comes from my understanding that 16 bit is a wider gamut than 8 bit.

[aRJun]

Back to the OP...

Is this banding vertical or horizontal?

Are you shooting your panos in M mode with no polarizer?

In the sky from left to right...banding is vertical.

Shooting in M mode and I don't have a polarizer :-s

[rammy]

Can't see anything wrong in that one shot. Why don't you resize your pano to 800px width and post a sample here. How much do you overlap your images by?

[aRJun]

Can't see anything wrong in that one shot. Why don't you resize your pano to 800px width and post a sample here. How much do you overlap your images by?

Here you go:

http://arjun.smugmug.com/photos/151222216-O.jpg

I overlap more than 50% all the time.

[manipula]

In my experience banding if present, be it from vignetting from lenses or whatever, if still present once stitched is down to the software. The best two I've tried are Panorama Factory and Realviz's Stitcher Unlimited, both of which have such good blending modes that filters or not, I've never experienced banding.

Try something a bit more special on the software front.

[aRJun]

In my experience banding if present, be it from vignetting from lenses or whatever, if still present once stitched is down to the software. The best two I've tried are Panorama Factory and Realviz's Stitcher Unlimited, both of which have such good blending modes that filters or not, I've never experienced banding.

Try something a bit more special on the software front.

I agree what I'm using is free and may not be the best (though to me it does an awesome job).

But I really want to see the banding on screen. If I can't see it, I can't say what I'm using is not doing the job.

[Moppie]

But I really want to see the banding on screen. If I can't see it, I can't say what I'm using is not doing the job.

Can you post a larger version of the whole pano?
I couldn't see any banding in the single shot you posted (which looked like a crop?)

[manipula]

Panorama Factory is free...

[aRJun]

Can you post a larger version of the whole pano?
I couldn't see any banding in the single shot you posted (which looked like a crop?)


Yeah that was a 100% crop. And I posted that part since I see banding in that very part in the 12" by 36" print.

I'm not sure how large would be good enough to see the banding if it can't be seen in that part.

[Moppie]

Yeah that was a 100% crop. And I posted that part since I see banding in that very part in the 12" by 36" print.

I'm not sure how large would be good enough to see the banding if it can't be seen in that part.


I wonder if the problem is the printer?

[aRJun]

I wonder if the problem is the printer?


Could be...I'm also starting to think so...I print it at pixeloutpost...they're close to where I live...maybe I should try something else.

[cosworth]

Panorama Factory is free...

Nope.

$70 bux

http://www.panoramafactory.com/

[rammy]

That pic looks fine at that size. Even with an increase and decrease in levels to exaggerate the lighting, there does not seem to be anything obvious. Try adjusting the levels on your larger version, move the black and white point sliders to increase or decrease the levels and see if you can see the banding in the extremes.

[StewartR]

aRJun, I've had a close look at the 100% crop you posted (this one (http://arjun.smugmug.com/photos/151216587-O.jpg)) and I've pulled the contrast, brightness, saturation and hue all over the place. I simply do not see any banding whatsoever.

I think Moppie is right. I think it's the printer.

[rammy]

Nope.

$70 bux

http://www.panoramafactory.com/

There is a freeware version available at v1.6 which you can still download:

http://www.photo-freeware.net/panoramafactory.php

£35 quid isn't bad for version 4.5 :-)

[aRJun]

aRJun, I've had a close look at the 100% crop you posted (this one (http://arjun.smugmug.com/photos/151216587-O.jpg)) and I've pulled the contrast, brightness, saturation and hue all over the place. I simply do not see any banding whatsoever.

I think Moppie is right. I think it's the printer.

Thanks so much for doing this Stewart..really appreciate it...I'll get it printed with a different website this time around..maybe mpix...would anyone here know of a good place online where I can order pano prints (3:1 ratio) from?

Looks like I can live with my laptop monitor for now...doesn't seem to be a problem with it.

[aRJun]

There is a freeware version available at v1.6 which you can still download:

http://www.photo-freeware.net/panoramafactory.php

£35 quid isn't bad for version 4.5 :-)

Hmm yea that's not bad...until I can find faults with enblend for now, I think I'll stick to it :)

[ATucker]

Which version of Enblend are you using. Version 3.0 is out and for me is very stable: http://enblend.sourceforge.net/

As stated before, use a 16 bit process as far as possible. 16 bit does not increase the gamut. Enblend allows a 16 bit workflow. Read this article from the Enblend website - including the second paragraph and banding in prints:

http://enblend.sourceforge.net/banding.htm

Use the "-a" switch with Enblend.

Also consider increasing the levels Enblend uses for blending. Try setting the levels switch to "-l10". (that is a small letter "L" 10). Read the whole first page of this post:

http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?t=2991
http://www.higherworld.com/blending/

Another option is to try Smartblend - also free: http://smartblend.panotools.info/

When using Smartblend, do not use the Enblend switches. Some of them may cause Smartblend to freeze. I am not sure how Hugin handles plug-ins so this may be a non-issue.

For more on this subject, go to: http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/search.php
and searching for sky banding.

I hope it is the printing, but if not, perhaps one of the above items will help.

Good Luck

[aRJun]

Which version of Enblend are you using. Version 3.0 is out and for me is very stable: http://enblend.sourceforge.net/

As stated before, use a 16 bit process as far as possible. 16 bit does not increase the gamut. Enblend allows a 16 bit workflow. Read this article from the Enblend website - including the second paragraph and banding in prints:

http://enblend.sourceforge.net/banding.htm

Use the "-a" switch with Enblend.

Also consider increasing the levels Enblend uses for blending. Try setting the levels switch to "-l10". (that is a small letter "L" 10). Read the whole first page of this post:

http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?t=2991
http://www.higherworld.com/blending/

Another option is to try Smartblend - also free: http://smartblend.panotools.info/

When using Smartblend, do not use the Enblend switches. Some of them may cause Smartblend to freeze. I am not sure how Hugin handles plug-ins so this may be a non-issue.

For more on this subject, go to: http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/search.php
and searching for sky banding.

I hope it is the printing, but if not, perhaps one of the above items will help.

Good Luck

I also got version 3 recently but at the time this pano was stitched, I didn't have that. Somehow in version 3, I see a new line in the command line processing ..something like 'Working on 1 distinct seam'...that's interesting.

Anyway, my main concern as stated before was to see the banding on my screen. If I can't see any, I can't say I did anything wrong in my post processing. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

[ATucker]

If I can't see any, I can't say I did anything wrong in my post processing. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Understood and I agree. But like one other poster to this thread, I took your image and applied obscene curves to it and could not find any signs of banding. So maybe these additional methods will help fix the problem even though you cannot see it.

Hopefully your post at Tawbaware will yield results. I am not sure what file format your printer uses but if they take jpeg's only, make sure you save them at 100% to reduce posterization. Also, some printers auto-adjust the image. If your printer does this, makes sure to tell them not to. Again, good luck, it is a nice pano that would look good on the wall.

[aRJun]

Understood and I agree. But like one other poster to this thread, I took your image and applied obscene curves to it and could not find any signs of banding. So maybe these additional methods will help fix the problem even though you cannot see it.

Hopefully your post at Tawbaware will yield results. I am not sure what file format your printer uses but if they take jpeg's only, make sure you save them at 100% to reduce posterization. Also, some printers auto-adjust the image. If your printer does this, makes sure to tell them not to. Again, good luck, it is a nice pano that would look good on the wall.

Thanks a lot for your efforts on this and also for your comments on the photo. It does look good on the wall, just trying to get it better :)

I just wish we had a forum for panos on this, just like Sports, Birds, etc. I was actually really contemplating getting a display so my panos don't show banding when printing. It's good to know that I don't have that need currently. I give the guys at pixeloutpost a 16 bit TIFF. Don't know what their process is there on. I was at their shop..saw my pano on their monitor (should be a calibrated one) and I didn't see any banding there. I guess their printer is auto adjusting then. Will talk to them.

[Bobster]

CRT vs LCD accuracy is a dead topic. It was proved that good LCD have a wider gamut of color than CRT and not more banding than a CRT.

You only have to choose a good LCD capable of displaying 16bit color. Cheap LCD are only 12bit so you can have banding with those. Keep away from TN matrix

actually TN panels display 18bit colour - 6bits per pixel (newer displays have some extra technology to help fool the eye into thinking there are more colours so will display 16.2million) - alot of older laptops will only display 18bits and use dithering to try and fool you into thinking there is 24bits - so you won't see things like banding as the banding will be dithered away by the screen..

true colour panels display 24bit - 8bits per pixel (16.7mil)

some of the more expensive TFT's claim 10bits per pixel..

[aRJun]

actually TN panels display 18bit colour - 6bits per pixel (newer displays have some extra technology to help fool the eye into thinking there are more colours so will display 16.2million) - alot of older laptops will only display 18bits and use dithering to try and fool you into thinking there is 24bits - so you won't see things like banding as the banding will be dithered away by the screen..

true colour panels display 24bit - 8bits per pixel (16.7mil)

some of the more expensive TFT's claim 10bits per pixel..

It's all greek to me...can you elaborate on the laptop bit....what would you mean by dithered away by the screen?