Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > "Virtual" wide angle via stitching seems to have less distortion

Reply
Thread Tools

"Virtual" wide angle via stitching seems to have less distortion

 
 
rowan194
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006
I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
comparison with a standard single shot:

http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg

I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.

Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
into one!

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joseph Meehan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006
rowan194 wrote:
> I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
> comparison with a standard single shot:
>
> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>
> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>
> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
> into one!


Since the software has to do a little stretching when it does the
stitching, I suggest that it is correcting some of the distortion, just as
you might have done to the single image.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alf92
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006
rowan194 ((E-Mail Removed)) a écrit
dans news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com :

> I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
> comparison with a standard single shot:
>
> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>
> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>
> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
> into one!



yes.
however, some software (even freeware) exit to correct te lens distortion.
like this one : http://www.photo-freeware.net/ptlens.php

--
Cordialement,
Alf92
======> http://petition.la-bas.org/


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006

"rowan194" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
> comparison with a standard single shot:
>
> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>
> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>
> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
> into one!
>


I have done some good 7 shot wides and one 13 that was far more than one
lens could do.


 
Reply With Quote
 
bugbear
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006
Alf92 wrote:
>
> yes.
> however, some software (even freeware) exit to correct te lens distortion.
> like this one : http://www.photo-freeware.net/ptlens.php
>


More good stuff here, including a list of software
at the bottom of the page:

http://www.panotools.info/mediawiki/...rrection_model

BugBear
 
Reply With Quote
 
kosh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-30-2006
rowan194 wrote:
> I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
> comparison with a standard single shot:
>
> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>
> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>
> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
> into one!
>


as you would expect shooting at a more standadard focal length for the
stiched shot.

to avoid prbelms with distortion when making long panoramas I generally
get best result around the 40mm equivilant. When I do this the stitches
are often seemless.

kosh
 
Reply With Quote
 
Nige
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2006
kosh wrote:
> rowan194 wrote:
>
>> I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
>> comparison with a standard single shot:
>>
>> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>>
>> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
>> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
>> into one!
>>

>
> as you would expect shooting at a more standadard focal length for the
> stiched shot.
>
> to avoid prbelms with distortion when making long panoramas I generally
> get best result around the 40mm equivilant. When I do this the stitches
> are often seemless.
>
> kosh


yes, most books on the matter suggest using normalish (50mm) focal
lengths. They also suggest turning the camera into 'portrait' mode to
get more vertical coverage and take more frames to cover the horizontal.

Nige
 
Reply With Quote
 
Don Wiss
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2006
On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:33:59 +1000, Nige <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>yes, most books on the matter suggest using normalish (50mm) focal
>lengths. They also suggest turning the camera into 'portrait' mode to
>get more vertical coverage and take more frames to cover the horizontal.


The reason you do that is you have the best stitch results if the middle of
your picture lines up with the horizon. And in the portrait orientation
you'll get more of the scene below the horizon.

Don <www.donwiss.com/pictures/> (e-mail link at page bottoms).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2006
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:45:33 GMT, kosh <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> to avoid prbelms with distortion when making long panoramas I generally
> get best result around the 40mm equivilant. When I do this the stitches
> are often seemless.


For those of us stuck in the Point&Shoot world, this is easy advice to
follow. My latest attempt at stitching, 3 frames with an FZ5 (widest
focal length 36mm):

http://ri22.uchicago.edu/~dmsilev/tibetan_concert.jpg

It stitched pretty well, except for a few inconsiderate people in the
foreground who moved around a bit between frames.

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
Gene Palmiter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-01-2006
Stitching is great fun...but the reason it doesn't distort is 1) software
correction and 2) you are not using an extreme wide angle....so you start
with less distortion.

--
Thanks,
Gene Palmiter
(visit my photo gallery at http://palmiter.dotphoto.com)
freebridge design group

"Pete D" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:44a51ce0$0$12221$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "rowan194" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>>I was playing with a 3x3 stitched image today and for fun did a
>> comparison with a standard single shot:
>>
>> http://satin.sensation.net.au/rowan/widecompare.jpg
>>
>> I found it interesting that although the stitched image has a
>> noticeably wider FOV, there's a lot less perspective distortion.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it's a lot of work (and CPU time) to stitch 9 images
>> into one!
>>

>
> I have done some good 7 shot wides and one 13 that was far more than one
> lens could do.
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
distortion free wide angle lens bacra Digital Photography 14 12-15-2006 05:41 PM
Not many "wide-angle" compacts but, heck, many are wide-angle anyway! JeffOYB@hotmail.com Digital Photography 10 01-09-2006 08:30 AM
wide angle lense distortion (objects appear larger at the edge)? peter Digital Photography 10 04-12-2005 06:39 AM
anyone notice barrel distortion with dimage XT when lens is setted at wide angle? TIA Jen Digital Photography 2 02-20-2004 10:53 PM
Wide-angle distortion on a digital Mike Graham Digital Photography 4 10-01-2003 05:30 PM



Advertisments