How good is photo stitching software?

I'll be holidaying in Europe soon and will be taking a XSI and Tamron 28-75. Love the Tamron but the range is odd - not particularly wide and not particularly long. How good is photo stitching software these days? If I stitch 2-3 shots together and print out at 16 x 19in (A3+) will the result be acceptable?

Thanks,

Hal55

Hal55,

As long as you follow a few fairly simple rules when shooting, almost any stitching programme can do a perfect job. It's when the rules are not followed that most tend to struggle.

So what rules?

Keep the camera level, so this means a tripod generally.
Keep the exposure and focus point constant.
Keep the white balance fixed (not AWB).
Allow a reasonable overlap between frames, maybe plan to use a tree or a building edge as a join.

I don't use a nodal point base, but if you want to include subjects that are closer to the camera, then it might be useful. I also have never used a self leveling base because its not difficult to set a tripod up level, but others say they are useful.

Handholding is only a problem because the camera sways around. If it was possible to stand like a statue, then using the camera like a fire hose might work but I certainly cannot achieve it.

I used some free photostitching software that did a good job. I think it was called autostitch from memory, but I can double-check if you like.

I basically gave it a load of jpegs and it automatically worked out how to stitch them together, and the seams are fairly invisible.

I shot in manual mode to obtain a consistent exposure, and in RAW mode to guarantee my white balance was identical in each shot.

Here's my first attempt (clouds look a bit screwy but that's my fault, I overdid the post processing a little)

http://farm4.static.fl​ickr.com …58128361_3ae8cb​cd6f_o.jpg

Thanks for the two pieces of advice. After buying the camera combination funds aren't really there to purchase a WA lens so I'm trying to avoid having to do that - particularly as any lens I did buy would have to be in the "very budget" category.
I couldn't see the seams on the sample provided, I take it I can be pretty sure that, done correctly, any stitched prints will be invisible on a printout?

Hal55

Providing you keep a consistent exposure and colour balance it ought to be seamless. However, there are certain things to bear in mind. Shooting scenes where there's lots of movement can make the stitching a nightmare as you'll have the same car appear twice in the photo, or maybe the same people. Also shooting the sea is difficult close up because none of the waves will stitch together.

BTW, I shot the above example with a 100mm macro lens held in the vertical position rather than horizontal as I wanted to get the sky and the sea in. As your Tamron will only go as wide as 28mm you might want to consider taking some shots in the vertical (portrait) orientation, especially if you're fairly close to the action. It will require more shots to stitch together.

If I were you I'd experiment before you go.

By the way, the final images should look great at A3+ sizes as you're going to end up with an image much larger and with more pixels than if you'd taken a single shot.

Thanks for the info - BTW, the location looks great (Europe somewhere??)
Where was it - looks lovely anyway,
Cheers,

Hal55

Scarborough, which is on the east coast of England.

I had actually brought the wrong lens with me (I normally take the 17-55) and only had the 100mm macro. It's a great view from up there, I want to go back when the light's a bit better as you can get some very dramatic skies.

I used Photoshop CS4 for this and was quite pleased with the result. The tripod helps but I did some handheld using the horizan as a reference point and it was also good. Both were quite seemless.

As Jo said and I completely forgot about, panoramas are usually taken of fairly static subjects. But there can be exceptions - I've got a very funny pano of rush hour on the Grande Canal in Venice, boats and people everywhere. The snag is that no stitching software can cope with it, so anything like that will have to be assembled by hand and need work after that!

Canons free photostitch software (on the CD) is as good as any provided you don't break the rules.

Thanks for the input, I'm going out next weekend to start practising - all good fun and if stitching saves me having to buy another lens, which at this point I can't afford anyway, it will be a real bonus.

Thanks to all,

Hal55

Photo stitching has almost done away with the need for a WA lens, see my post here, https://photography-on-the.net …43%2F35mm.jpg%5​B%2FIMG%5D

Lowner wrote in post #7580908
The snag is that no stitching software can cope with it

By their advertising, Autopano Pro can.

Two different stiching softwares: PTGui and Hugin (free).

Rene,

I think the producers of Autopano Pro need to see my example before they make claims like that. I've still got a little tweaking to do, but I am having to cut and paste bits of this shot over other bits from other images and they all need distorting but it will work - eventually.

Have you tried Hugin for your Venice shot Richard?

The reason I suggest it is that you can tell Hugin to output the individual distorted images as well as the blended output. You can then bring each image in as a layer and apply layer masks to them to paint in or out those elements you don't wish.

I made a 3 shot panorama of Siena cathedral, it had cars and people moving all over the place but the method above made it a fairly painless process to paint in/out elements appropriately.

Electric Shepherd,

I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours?

i am still working on it as there are a number of spots were reality has broken down. In fact probably truer to say many such spots!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.