Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 30 Sep 2007 (Sunday) 00:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Really getting annoyed at Pano pics not coming out right

 
2005GLI
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Likes: 72
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Jersey
     
Sep 30, 2007 00:38 |  #1

Ok I finally got the chance to go back down to weehawkin,nj to get a pano of manhattan from the George Washington Bridge to the Verrazano bridge ((about 12 miles or so)
Got there set up, took a reading of f/10@10seconds using iso 100, xt with kit lens (24-105 is getting serviced). Everything looked good on the lcd screen. Got home and started the photomerge and noticed:
1. Underexposed pretty bad
2. Not as sharp as I'de like, had no problem autofocsing.
3. To much noise for iso100
4. used manual mode, but when pics were arranged in PSE2.0, i got the one pic or 2 that has a brighter sky then the rest clearly showing the merge. What I dont understand is if the shots were all at the same shutter speed and aperture how could this happen?

Here's the pic, not sure if it will show up or not.
http://img294.imagesha​ck.us …noseptermber29t​h20yo3.jpg (external link)


|Canon 80D|40D backup|24-105 F4/L|Sigma 70-200 F/2.8|Sigma 150-500 C|
|Tokina 12-24|Sigma 8mm Fisheye|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
Sep 30, 2007 09:20 |  #2

2005GLI wrote in post #4034649 (external link)
1. Underexposed pretty bad
2. Not as sharp as I'de like, had no problem autofocsing.
3. To much noise for iso100
4. used manual mode, but when pics were arranged in PSE2.0, i got the one pic or 2 that has a brighter sky then the rest clearly showing the merge. What I dont understand is if the shots were all at the same shutter speed and aperture how could this happen?

1) The camera LCD is not an accurate judge for exposure. Use the histogram.
2) Are you sure it's not camera shake or so? Post a 100% crop.
3) Because it was underexposed and corrected in processing?
4) No idea.

Nice image though.


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DavidEB
Goldmember
Avatar
3,117 posts
Joined Feb 2005
Location: North Carolina
     
Sep 30, 2007 11:02 |  #3

couple of guesses:

shooting over water you can get air convection which makes the image blur a little.

did you set manual white balance? or auto? it can change from shot to shot in a pano and change the sky color.


David
my stuff - [URL="http://www.pbase​.com/davideb"]my gallery - [URL="http://photograp​hy-on-the.net/forum/showpost​.php?p=3928125&postcou​nt=1"]go Rats!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2005GLI
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Likes: 72
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Jersey
     
Sep 30, 2007 11:13 as a reply to  @ DavidEB's post |  #4

Wasn't till after i posted that i realized the one thing i truly hate about the xt is the lcd. If you look at it at one angle its nice and colorfull, look at it the way it should and its to dark. Thats one of the things i love about the 40d, the lcd does not change color if moved arond a bit.

This is a 100%crop or it should be. I sized it up at 100% in ps and saved it that way. If printed it would be roughly 50 inches by 8 inches or so. The white balance was set to tungsten, it was the only wb that gave the most correct true color. I didn't bring the expodisc with me, wish i had to see if it made a difference in this scene. But im still confused about the high amount of noise for iso100. Hoping for another crystal clear night tonight. Going to write down my settings and change them up once i get down there.


|Canon 80D|40D backup|24-105 F4/L|Sigma 70-200 F/2.8|Sigma 150-500 C|
|Tokina 12-24|Sigma 8mm Fisheye|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
Sep 30, 2007 11:37 |  #5

2005GLI wrote in post #4036406 (external link)
This is a 100%crop or it should be.

No, it isn't.
100% crop.


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Oct 01, 2007 00:05 |  #6

Well, it's hard to tell from what you've posted, but I don't think that image is bad really.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2005GLI
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Likes: 72
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Jersey
     
Oct 01, 2007 03:44 |  #7

if you click on the pic in the second liknk when it pops up it becomes larger. you'll see the different frames and how they didn't stitch properly and all the noise. and now i see a halo effect on it too.


|Canon 80D|40D backup|24-105 F4/L|Sigma 70-200 F/2.8|Sigma 150-500 C|
|Tokina 12-24|Sigma 8mm Fisheye|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
Oct 01, 2007 05:31 |  #8

If I click it, I get an image of something like 4" high. Still not big enough to judge sharpness or noise...


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Oct 01, 2007 06:02 |  #9

^ Yea, what he said... and based on that, it looks fine.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2005GLI
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Likes: 72
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Jersey
     
Oct 02, 2007 00:00 as a reply to  @ amonline's post |  #10

ok here is the imageshack link that works the best. Click on the link below, when the page opens click on the photo it will give the actuall size that i saved it at.

http://img294.imagesha​ck.us …noseptermber29t​h20yo3.jpg (external link)


|Canon 80D|40D backup|24-105 F4/L|Sigma 70-200 F/2.8|Sigma 150-500 C|
|Tokina 12-24|Sigma 8mm Fisheye|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
Oct 02, 2007 02:53 |  #11

That's an image 436 pixels high, 3422 wide.
Would make a 1,453 by 11,407" print...


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StewartR
"your nose is too big"
Avatar
4,269 posts
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Maidenhead, UK
     
Oct 02, 2007 07:09 |  #12

Sharpness. Too small. Even that "large version" is only 3,422 x 436 pixels, as René says. The original should have been about 18,000 x 2,300 if shot in landscape orientation, or 27,000 x 3,400 if shot in portrait orientation. Show us a crop from that - or even from a version that's been resized to say 9,000 x 1,100 - and then we can comment on the image quality.

Stitching problems. Even if you shoot manual, it's essential that you avoid altering the exposure when you do the RAW conversion. And it's also essential to have the same White Balance in each shot. Did you do that? (You haven't told us yet.)

Exposure. I think you're probably OK. You said you shot at ISO 100, 10s at f/10. Both of these two of mine were taken at ISO 100, 5s at f/8, which is about 2/3 of a stop LESS than your effort, and they're clearly fine.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

www.LensesForHire.co.u​k (external link) - complete with matching POTN discussion thread
Photos: Cats (external link) | London by day (external link) | London by night (external link) I My POTN photo sharing threads (external link) | Official "Where Am I Now?" archive (external link)
Gear: 350D | Sigma 18-200mm | EF-S 10-22mm | EF 50mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2005GLI
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Likes: 72
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Jersey
     
Oct 03, 2007 00:25 |  #13

Dam, i didn't know i needed to size the pic that big. I wish i still had the original files, i deleted the card already.

I shot the pics in landscape, using manual .jpg with same settings on all pics with same wb on all pics. I didn't do any PP to the pics till after they were merged.


|Canon 80D|40D backup|24-105 F4/L|Sigma 70-200 F/2.8|Sigma 150-500 C|
|Tokina 12-24|Sigma 8mm Fisheye|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StewartR
"your nose is too big"
Avatar
4,269 posts
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Maidenhead, UK
     
Oct 03, 2007 03:23 |  #14

2005GLI wrote in post #4054258 (external link)
I wish i still had the original files, i deleted the card already.

Doh!

Still, at least you've learned a valuable lesson from the exercise... even if that lesson is nothing to do with making a pano...


www.LensesForHire.co.u​k (external link) - complete with matching POTN discussion thread
Photos: Cats (external link) | London by day (external link) | London by night (external link) I My POTN photo sharing threads (external link) | Official "Where Am I Now?" archive (external link)
Gear: 350D | Sigma 18-200mm | EF-S 10-22mm | EF 50mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Oct 03, 2007 06:53 |  #15

Who deletes original images?!? ??? I think THAT'S the lesson learned here. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,153 views & 0 likes for this thread
Really getting annoyed at Pano pics not coming out right
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is WilliamParman
477 guests, 298 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.