Another Brisbane at night pano..

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Mark Thomas, Aug 14, 2008.

  1. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    More work in progress..

    Fuji S9000, fl~35mm, 3s f5.6, 5 images, PTGUI, adjusted levels/sat,
    lightly denoised, reduced to about 1/3 size and USM.
    (Need any of this explained or elaborated? just ask..)

    Two conflicting thoughts struck me while taking the source images:

    1. Why doesn't Brisbane City Council light up the botanical gardens a
    bit, so it doesn't look like a huge black slug in the middle of my
    image..? (O:

    and then, hypocritically

    2. Do all of those building lights really need to be on, wasting energy
    like it doesn't matter? (OK, it *was* only about 6pm on a weekday, so I
    guess it just reflects the long hours we Qlder's work.)

    In regard to the image - yes, I'm aware of the stitching errors in the
    foreground handrails, due to me shooting this without a pano head.
    Maybe I'll go back and fiddle with the control points, maybe not -
    consider it a copyright message to prevent misuse...!

    And in hindsight, I should probably have used HDR to get more detail in
    the sky. But the sunset wasn't a winner, so I couldn't be bothered.
    Another for the maybe-next-time bin.

    Constructive criticism welcome.
    Mark Thomas, Aug 14, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Cheers, mate - nice to see you still pop by occasionally!
    Try to resist, even though the Force is strong!! I think they are
    starting to take over my hobby completely... aaargh..
    A lot depends on the software you are using.. ? I don't *normally*
    hesitate to use mine right down to 28mm with PTGUI, but.. read on..
    It depends.. If most/all of the subject matter is a reasonable distance
    away from you, then you will probably find you are ok down to 28mm, and
    handheld will suffice in most cases as long as you watch what you are
    doing. But if there is stuff up close to you, it will all get very
    tricky without that pano head - and longer f-l's will help.

    The image above is a case in point - I didn't shoot it very carefully,
    and it was at about 35mm f-l. The handrails and foliage were all quite
    close to my location.. When I gave the images to PTGUI, it did a fine
    job with the background stuff, but obviously had a problem with the
    handrail area. What you see is exactly what PTGUI gave me with no
    intervention on my part.

    I *did* briefly try adding a few control points to bring the handrail
    into line, but PTGUI basically told me I was asking the impossible. I
    told it to go ahead and try anyway - but when it tried to reconcile my
    inputs it had to change focal length assumptions and re-align (and
    misalign) stuff. In other words, it all went badly wrong because the
    parallax issues were too great for *automatic* stitching.

    It's a bit like the linear/stepped out issues that were beaten to death
    some time back. Too much parallax = no panorama!

    However... In this rather mild case, what I would do is simply go back
    to PTGUI's original default effort and ask for a PSD file - which has
    all the source images (deformed and aligned appropriately) as layers.
    Then I can use Photoshop to fiddle with it - a bit of erasing and
    stretching will have those rails sorted in a reasonably short time.
    I've done that sort of thing before, notably on this one:
    which had some similar problems.

    So it's horses for courses.. it really depends on the original scene and
    the software you are using.

    In summary, yes a pano head will help a lot if your pano's have a lot of
    deopth or close up stuff. So will using longer focal lengths, but of
    course the penalty is the extra time and effort.
    Again, it depends somewhat on the capabilities of the program you stitch
    with. The less the program has to stretch/distort images the better, so
    I guess yes is the answer.
    Plus panoramas by their nature tend to be
    'what-you-would-see-if-you-turn-your-head-around', so a level-ish and
    centred horizon seems to work better, for me anyways..

    And you can always crop high or low - increasingly I am shooting the
    source images portrait-ways, so I have a fair bit of head- and foot-room ..

    Hope that helps, sorry I waffled on..

    Mark Thomas, Aug 14, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hey neat pic..
    Maybe your onto something in your stitching..
    Escher's illusions and your handrails are on the right track for an
    Henry Kolesnik, Aug 14, 2008
  4. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Yes, when I saw the second handrail neatly misaligned with the lower
    edge of itself, Escher-esque images came to mind..
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  5. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    You lucky, lucky bastard! Coincidentally, I was in a fish and chip shop
    yesterday and saw two Santorini pictures upon their wall. But the
    genius who produced them didn't think the lovely colours of the houses
    and landscape was enough, so s/he had pasted in a (completely
    mismatched) sunset from another shot. The lighting was all wrong, and
    the images had simply been destroyed.

    I just saw the comparison you did - I'm sure I've seen folk recommending
    the Canon software, but the only examples I've seen have been similar to
    yours... Needless to say, I prefer PTGUI! Obviously Hugin seems to do
    well too.

    As for the focus-challenged tilt-shift shot.. Well, it made me chuckle!

    Good luck with the santorini trip. May the light be good! Look forward
    to seeing any you care to share.
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  6. Mark Thomas

    ^Tems^ Guest

    A couple I have done this week with PTGui (40d and 28-135 KIT lens)

    8 stitch

    6 stitch
    The centre horizon is very blown but 1/2 hour after sunset it is hard to
    get perfect light.
    ^Tems^, Aug 15, 2008
  7. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Very nice work.

    I don't regard that as blown - a bit washed out, maybe, but not that
    bad, and again it's a very nice scene. Maybe a candidate for HDR if you
    are into that sort of thing. (As if panoramas aren't enough work
    without hdr..!)

    Just what I need, more inspiration..!
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  8. Mark Thomas

    ^Tems^ Guest

    I have tried a few HDR panorama's.
    This one was more arty than an actual picture

    and a more normal one

    This is one you'll like

    69 photos taken at 300mm with my old 400d and 70-300 IS USM.

    The tree's aren't trimmed at the lookout so i had to stand on the top of
    a 4 inch pipe filled with concrete.
    This is reduced to 7% of original with a about 2 inches taken off each side.

    It took 2 hours to stitch at 20% with autopano. One afternoon i will
    set it up on the work computer at 100% and let it stitch overnight and
    see how it looks.
    ^Tems^, Aug 15, 2008
  9. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    As it happens, that is my third favorite hobby (photos first, then
    marine biology/anything ocean-related second, then stargazing third).
    But I've never had the desire to combine photography and astronomy*,
    preferring to leave that to David Malin and Hubble the Telescope.. By
    the way, even though some of the Hubble stuff is truly gob-smacking, I
    think David's AAO Pleiades image is *the* astronomy image...

    Oh, and I'll give Qld some credit in that a lot more of their street
    lighting is downwards directed than in Adelaide/SA.

    * That's not entirely true... I did take some rather uninspiring comet
    images when McNaught made its recent appearance - here's one of the
    weirder ones..
    I was quite cheesed off when these folk setup right in front of me and
    started flashing away (to capture what was presumably their first time
    out with their Tasco - woohoo!) (O:

    However, I quite like the unintended result!
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  10. Mark Thomas

    N Guest

    Is your photography more important than the life of the birds which live in
    the gardens?

    Do you sleep with your lights on?
    N, Aug 15, 2008
  11. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Do you have a sense of humour?
    Do you know what smilies are for?
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  12. Mark Thomas

    N Guest

    I'll take that as a yes to both my questions.
    N, Aug 15, 2008
  13. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Apart from *highlighting* the smilie in question (see above), I don't
    think I can help with your misconstrual in more simple terms, so I guess
    that ends this rather pointless diversion.

    "Fortunately the world is full of people who have differing opinions and
    Mark Thomas, Aug 15, 2008
  14. Mark Thomas

    That80sGuy Guest

    In message Mark Thomas
    N is apparently a liberal. Therefore "N" answers your question.
    That80sGuy, Aug 15, 2008
  15. Mark Thomas

    ^Tems^ Guest

    It's the entrance to lake Macquarie, just south of Newcastle.

    I ran the 170mm 70 shot one last night.
    Only thing edited is cropping the jagged edges.
    It saved as a 519mb PSD file.

    This one is 8.5mb jpg at level 8 on photoshop

    for the 35mm group

    This post is off-topic for this newsgroup,,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    I should use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras.
    One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:
    ^Tems^, Aug 16, 2008
  16. Mark Thomas

    ^Tems^ Guest

    You're not much for posting links to your work either.
    So without being able to see any of your work I can safely ignore your

    but, you really
    Once again, please provide a link to some of your work so I can see I
    can being criticised by someone worth listening to.
    The advantage of film hey, all your crap isn't see by the world and if
    you ever do put it up (which i doubt) you can blame the scanner for
    reducing the quality
    ^Tems^, Aug 16, 2008
  17. Mark Thomas

    Noons Guest

    ^Tems^ wrote,on my timestamp of 16/08/2008 11:15 AM:
    "12-Feb-2008 - We'll be right back in about 10 minutes. The main database choked
    and is restarting now. Sorry for the inconvenience. -slug "

    Noons, Aug 16, 2008
  18. Or yours, remember this gem

    Check out the area under the 2 in 2008.
    The steps and the tree magically taking over the path are on par with a
    floating half a ship

    Or create your own photographic society and tell everyone you have been
    a members for years.

    As for you Charlie... Your double and triple standards are just
    Didn't you say to Tems back in March
    You may have erased your history but he replied and kept your comment
    for google to archive

    Harold Hughes, Aug 16, 2008
  19. Mark Thomas

    Annika1980 Guest

    All those people looking at my pics sometimes strains the Pbase
    Over 2,000,000 happy customers so far in my galleries.
    Annika1980, Aug 16, 2008
  20. Mark Thomas

    D-Mac Guest

    Yeah harold... That was father someone or another. Now if it was Tems in
    drag, maybe you are he now?
    D-Mac, Aug 16, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.