Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Digital Image Stitching II

Reply
Thread Tools

Digital Image Stitching II

 
 
Paul Mitchum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
PanoramaLlama <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:10:30 -0700, (E-Mail Removed)0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:
>
> > ...the clouds were moving pretty quickly, so even though there were no
> > obvious parallax problems, the subject matter was changing between
> > shots. I had the visual equivalent of a skipping record. So I painted
> > the layer mask of the various layers to mask out the redundant clouds.
> > This is something no software can do (at present <g>),

>
> Any panorama editor that supports the "SmartBlend" plugin does exactly
> this, automatically, without any mucking about in PhotoShop. Hugin being
> one of them. PTGUI being another.


You're mistaken. No software can correctly align control points for
subject matter that has changed position in two different pictures.

If you'd read what I wrote, you'd see that I was using Hugin as you
suggested, and *needed* to change the control points manually because
the auto-point-finder thing messed it up.

> Why are people who keep their head stuck in PhotoShop so ignorant to all
> the better software out there? It's like PhotoShop makes them blind and
> ignorant, then it keeps them that way.


I use the tools I need to use to get the results I desire. Please don't
be a jerk.

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PanoramaLlama
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:39:19 -0700, (E-Mail Removed)0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:

>
>If you'd read what I wrote, you'd see that I was using Hugin as you
>suggested, and *needed* to change the control points manually because
>the auto-point-finder thing messed it up.


Then try using SmartBlend with PTGUI. I've never run into this problem you seem
to be having. I've had PTGUI and SmartBlend stitch photos that were impossible
in the past without extensive masking and hand cloning touch-ups.

The only "jerk" around here is someone that keeps their head stuck up their
last-century PhotoShop ass and never bother looking beyond it to find out that
the rest of the world passed them by 10 years ago.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ChrisM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
In message http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed),
(E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the
tallest tower:

> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:10:22 -0000, "ChrisM"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> Sorry, Hate this laptop. There's a touchpad at the front of the
>> keyboard, and if your not careful, you brush your hand against it
>> and it does a mouse click and sends your frikkin message before
>> you've finished writing it...
>>

> You can disable the touchpad. Here's how to do it in XP Pro: go to
> Control Panel, select Mouse, then select the rightmost tab which says
> Device Settings. Highlight the touchpad and click on the button that
> says Disable.
>
> It will be similar enough in other versions of Widows that you should
> be able to figure it out if you need to.


Thanks for the hint, however, I don't use a mouse with this laptop, actually
use the touchpad. I like using the touchpad, and it works very well, just
too easy to tap it by mistake when I'm typing...

--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


 
Reply With Quote
 
bugbear
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
ChrisM wrote:
With exposure, hopefully, on a
> distant subject, and as long as the light doesn't change (sun goes behind a
> cloud or something) the auto exposure should stay consistant(?). I guess I
> need to experiment. The camera does have options to fix shutter speed and
> aparture etc, so I can try all that...


If you turn though 180 degree to take your shots,
the light WILL change.

BugBear
 
Reply With Quote
 
ChrisM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
In message (E-Mail Removed),
PanoramaLlama <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the tallest tower:

> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:57:54 -0000, "ChrisM"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> With exposure, hopefully, on a
>> distant subject, and as long as the light doesn't change (sun goes
>> behind a cloud or something) the auto exposure should stay
>> consistant(?).

>
> No, it will not stay consistent on auto-exposure. Anything that
> changes the view will change the exposure and white-balance settings.
> It may not be apparent to your eye, or even when reviewing them in
> the camera, but rest assured that when you go to stitch them you will
> have glaring exposure and white-balance differences between the
> panorama panels that might be impossible to blend seamlessly.
>



Disclaimer: I'm a total novice here, so I'm not saying I know best. In fact
anything I say may be total rubbish, so feel free to correct me if I'm
missing the point anywhere.
Anyway,

White balance, I accept I will have to lock (ie set to manual).
Exposure (AIUI) is, in simple terms at least, a combination of shutter
speed and aparture (and ISO?).
My camera shows me all those settings as (just before) I take the picture,
so I can confirm they are the same for each picture.
The exposure settings are a function of the light available to the
camera(?), so the only way they will change is if the available light
changes (like if, as I said, the sun goes behind a cloud or something). If
that happens then I imagine it would be extremely hard to get identically
lit pictures anyway...?
To clarify, I'm really talking about outside panaramas of 'distant' objects
(landscapes, mountains etc.) I appreciate that the lighting situation is
probably more complicated with close up and/or indoor subjects(and, god
forbid, using a flash...)

--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


 
Reply With Quote
 
ChrisM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
In message (E-Mail Removed),
bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> Proclaimed from the tallest
tower:

> ChrisM wrote:
> With exposure, hopefully, on a
>> distant subject, and as long as the light doesn't change (sun goes
>> behind a cloud or something) the auto exposure should stay
>> consistant(?). I guess I need to experiment. The camera does have
>> options to fix shutter speed and aparture etc, so I can try all
>> that...

>
> If you turn though 180 degree to take your shots,
> the light WILL change.
>
> BugBear


Point taken. So I need to set the exposure correctly for the image with the
median brightness in the panarama I'm taking, then use the same setting for
all the pictures in the scene...
Which is (I think) what PanaramaLlama was saying...

--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


 
Reply With Quote
 
ChrisM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
In message (E-Mail Removed),
ChrisM <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the tallest tower:

> In message (E-Mail Removed) m,
> acl <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the tallest
> tower:
>> On Oct 31, 3:10 pm, "ChrisM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> In message (E-Mail Removed) om,
>>> acl <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the tallest
>>> tower:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 31, 12:54 pm, "ChrisM" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi, me again.
>>>
>>>>> Sorry to start a new thread but the previous one is getting a bit
>>>>> long, and I though this new question might get lost in the mist...
>>>
>>>>> So, I've had a play with Autostitch, Hugin and Pandora for GIMP.
>>>>> Didn't have much joy with Pandora, couldn't really work out how to
>>>>> use it within the GIMP interface, but GIMP runs slowly on my
>>>>> computer anyway, so it would probably have been a bit laborious
>>>>> trying to use that.
>>>>> Autostitch is excellent! Not sure how it works, but obviously
>>>>> written by someone very clever...
>>>
>>>>> Hugin is also pretty neat, though it requires a lot more effort. I
>>>>> had quite encouraging success playing with it last night. The
>>>>> series of photos were a bit rough and ready, and I didn't take any
>>>>> care to ensure they were all taken from exactly the same point so
>>>>> there was a fair bit of parallax difference between the images. It
>>>>> kind of worked though, and I now have a lovely 180 degrees
>>>>> panarama of my living room...
>>>>> Question on Hugin though, can it handle more than one row of
>>>>> photos, that is can it stitch a BLOCK of pictures together, say a
>>>>> 4x3 block or will it only do single height 'strips' of pictures
>>>>> (1x2, 1x3, 1x4 etc.). The reason I ask is that the interface only
>>>>> seems to let you set control points between a picture and one
>>>>> other picture. To stitch 2 dimentional blocks of photos, you'd
>>>>> need to be able to set control points between a picture and up to
>>>>> four others...
>>>
>>>> You can set up points between any pair of images, they are just
>>>> displayed side by side. By the way, did you install autosift? It
>>>> automatically puts control points when you load the images, and
>>>> this saves an enormous amount of time (many times you don't have
>>>> to do anything except select optimize and stitch).
>>>
>>> Sorry, Hate this laptop. There's a touchpad at the front of the
>>> keyboard, and if your not careful, you brush your hand against it
>>> and it does a mouse click and sends your frikkin message before
>>> you've finished writing it...
>>>
>>> As I was saying. I didn't explicitly install autosift, but something
>>> made an attempt to add some control points, but didn't do very well-
>>> probably because as I said earlier, my pictures didn't line up
>>> nicely. (think it said something about autopano???)
>>> Is Autosift better or the same thing as Autopano?
>>>
>>> Understand about lining up 'matrices' now, thanks (and to Daniel).
>>> Am hopefully doing a walk at the weekend, so if I get the chance,
>>> I'll try and take a set of photos and see if I can stick them all
>>> together!
>>> I'll throw the same set at Autostitch, and see who can do the best
>>> job
>>>

>>
>> probably autopano-sift.

>
> So that is Autosift or Autopano or are they both the same thing?
>
>>
>> OK if you took shots of your living room handheld, no wonder you got
>> parallax error: the closer things are, the more careful you have to
>> be. What you have to do is rotate the camera around the entrance
>> pupil, ie, look at the lens from the front, note where the aperture
>> stop appears to be, and attempt to rotate the camera around that
>> point (I hope that's clear!). A tripod without a panoramic head
>> won't help for close-up panoramas.

>
> Think I understand... so I effectively want to try and rotate the
> camera around its 'front lens'? A panoramic head would allow you to
> rotate the camera in this way I guess? TBH, with my little P&S, the
> lens doesn't stick out of the camera anyway, so rotating about the
> lens and rotating the camera (assuming I keep the axis through the
> lens) is pretty much the same thing anyway. Trying to think now if
> the tripod socket is inline with the lens or not... but can't
> remember... <Has a quick rummage in Google Images> ... ah yes, the
> tripod socket is directly below the lens, so rotating the camera on a
> normal tripod WOULD work reasonably well in my case I think(?)
> Anyway, normally, it will be photos of landscapes, and when I'm
> trying to make proper panaramas, I WILL take much more care. This was
> a case of wanting half a dozen pictures to play with, so get the
> camera out and click,click,click,click,click,click as I'm standing in
> the centre of the room and turning slightly for each picture.
> To be honest, considering how badly some of the pictures line up, the
> job it did (once I'd given it enough control points) is not too bad.
> If you look closely, the perspective looks a bit odd, and there are
> kind of 'creases' in one or two of the joins, but I suppose however
> well you do it, a 3D room 'opened out' into a 2D picture IS going to
> look a little bit strange...
>
>
> Regards,
> Chris.
> (Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


Just for completeness, and in case anyone is interested, this is a link to
my first attempt at a panarama:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ChrisMPh...38819408017314

I've learned a lot already from this, and my next attempt will hopefully be
better. You can clearly see several parallax problems and there are a couple
of points where things plain don't line up (the lamp and the central picture
frame) I guess some of this could be improved with a little effort in GIMP
or PaintShop, anyway the overall effect, to me at least is quite satisfying
while at the same time gives me plenty to work on and improve...
Weather permitting, I'll have a go at an outside (landscape) panarama this
weekend which AIUI, should be a lot easier and will hopefully look better!!


--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


 
Reply With Quote
 
acl
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
On Nov 1, 5:40 pm, "ChrisM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


http://picasaweb.google.com/ChrisMPh...oto#5127638819...


You have a dog named Andy McNabb?!

 
Reply With Quote
 
ChrisM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
In message (E-Mail Removed) om,
acl <(E-Mail Removed)> Proclaimed from the tallest tower:

> On Nov 1, 5:40 pm, "ChrisM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/ChrisMPh...oto#5127638819...
>
>
> You have a dog named Andy McNabb?!


.... and? That name plate cost me a lot of money!

--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)


 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Mitchum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-01-2007
PanoramaLlama <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:39:19 -0700, (E-Mail Removed)0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:
>
> >
> >If you'd read what I wrote, you'd see that I was using Hugin as you
> >suggested, and *needed* to change the control points manually because
> >the auto-point-finder thing messed it up.

>
> Then try using SmartBlend with PTGUI. I've never run into this problem you
> seem to be having.


Then you don't know that 'SmartBlend with PTGUI' can fix it. I'm sure
it's a dandy piece of software; I just have no desire to use it, because
I have my own way of working and I'm comfortable with it.

> I've had PTGUI and SmartBlend stitch photos that were impossible in the
> past without extensive masking and hand cloning touch-ups.
>
> The only "jerk" around here is someone that keeps their head stuck up
> their last-century PhotoShop ass and never bother looking beyond it to
> find out that the rest of the world passed them by 10 years ago.


Whatever, man.

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html
 
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
Re: Digital Image Stitching II Ron Hunter Digital Photography 15 11-04-2007 07:41 AM
Digital Image Stitching ChrisM Digital Photography 39 11-01-2007 07:06 AM
panorama mode and stitching with digital rebel xti parth_vakil@yahoo.com Digital Photography 10 06-04-2007 04:38 PM
stitching software for digital phots LouisB Digital Photography 15 08-02-2006 03:36 PM
Image stitching Graeme Digital Photography 9 08-07-2003 02:13 PM



Advertisments