Canon PhotoStitch/Photoshop Elements?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003.

  1. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    I have Canon PhotoStitch as part of the Canon ZoomBrowser and though it does a
    pretty good job at lining up the photos but it does a terrible job of blending
    in the seams so you end up seeing a darkening at the overlap which basically
    makes it useless. My question is to those using Photoshop Elements is if it
    blends in to the point where you can't see such a darkening of seams?
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. zbzbzb

    Zol. Guest

    I suspect the main problem here is not with the stiching but with the exposures of the
    images themselves, you don`t say what camera you use but the best thing to do is to lock off
    the focus & exposures.light metering to ensure that you have consistant parameters for the
    photo stich - photoshop elements can be better at joins and sometimes worse but at least you
    have more control over each image before stiching together (i.e. you can correct for
    different exposures to a degree for a better blend) it also features some `advanced
    blending` which may or may not help, regards ... Zol.
     
    Zol., Dec 1, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    I suspect the main problem here is not with the stiching but with the
    Exposures are identical. It is the programs inability to blend the overlaps. It
    is in effect having a "multiply" effect in those areas.

    I'm just looking for a cheap alternative that can make seamless blends. Thanks
    anyway.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003
    #3
  4. zbzbzb

    Don Coon Guest

    I'm puzzled (as I often am : ), because I use PhotoStitch often and have
    rarely, if ever, noticed any "multiply" effect. I used it with my Pro90 in
    the Stitch Assist mode and now my 10D. The only flaws I see are seam
    mismatches 'cuz I'm often hand holding the camera.
     
    Don Coon, Dec 1, 2003
    #4
  5. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    Exposures are identical. It is the programs inability to blend the
    Apparently I am not the only one since I have seen many such examples of my own
    doing a quick research on the matter. You notice it best when there is say alot
    of sky and it shows as slight darkening in the overlapped areas. It's a shame
    because other than that it does a nice job.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003
    #5
  6. zbzbzb

    Zol. Guest

    In that case try this - when using the photostich program - you can manually select the
    overlaps - let the software do 1 pass, then select the `display seams`, next you can click
    on the seams individually and select the overlap points (best to do this in a straight line
    if you can hortizontal or vertical for best results - I have a railway photo that I did with
    a Canon A40 back in febraury, take a look at -
    www.theone.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rails.jpg &
    www.theone.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/platform.jpg - I played with panotoold & a few others but in
    the end I went back to use the photostich program which came with the canon camera, regards
    .... Zol.
     
    Zol., Dec 1, 2003
    #6
  7. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    In that case try this - when using the photostich program - you can manually
    I've tried messing with the overlaps manually with no success. Your samples are
    also good scenes to hide the problem. You have very little sky and what you
    have is blown out to white or near white and there is plenty of other detail
    and tones to mask it. Thanks though.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003
    #7
  8. zbzbzb

    Zol. Guest

    That`s mainly because they were taken in winter and quite grey/white skies :)

    Another example is this one taken just after a rain shower -
    www.theone.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Hill.jpg - there is a slight blending mark there and I think
    this is what you are trying to explain, the best thing would be to process images like this
    with elements (use the clone brush & blur) to blend away any inperfections also if you
    shoot towards the sun expect to get a lot of difference, you might find shooting in smaller
    steps will help also, regards ... Zol.
     
    Zol., Dec 1, 2003
    #8
  9. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    Yeah cloning is not an option as it would be extremely time consuming to do.
    I'll guess I'll just have to look into other pano programs. It's a shame
    because I like the way the whole stich feature is integrated into Canon's
    ZoomBrowser program. Thanks for the responses. :)
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 1, 2003
    #9
  10. zbzbzb

    Joe Guest

    I found that while Zoombrowser's PhotoStitch did okay many
    times, sometimes the results were really bad, especially in
    the skies.

    So I switched to Panorama Factory -
    http://www.panoramafactory.com/

    For me, this does a fantastic job. And when it does have
    trouble with some photos, you have an incredible amount of
    control over the blending process. For example, you can see
    the tile pattern it uses in the blending area, and manually
    move individual tiles around to get the right match. You can
    also control settings for barrel distortion and brightness
    falloff, which really helps. I have 2 galleries of panorams
    put together with Panoram Factory - in a few, you can still
    see seams in the skies - maybe I could fix that if I spent
    more time on fine tuning, but I'm sure that these looked
    pretty bad in PhotoStitch:

    http://www.joekaz.net/photos/


    Also, I just got Photoshop Elements bundled with another
    purchase, and tried it's panorama stitching. I expected it to
    surpass Panorama Factory, but the results were hideous!
     
    Joe, Dec 1, 2003
    #10
  11. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    I found that while Zoombrowser's PhotoStitch did okay many
    Outstanding Joe! I tried the trial version and without adjusting any settings
    and without using the wizard I have gotten perfect blending and joining of up
    to 5 images so far with no darkening at all at the seams. Very impressive! It
    isn't so cheap at $60 but as well as it works without any fuss this looks like
    what I will end up using.

    You say you still have some visible seams in your skys and I need to ask if you
    are using their latest version and without the wizard at the default settings
    because I can't see any seams so far in my tests. I tried their old freeware
    version which is worthless so you may want to try their newest version and at
    the default non wizard settings I mentioned.

    Thanks for the tip off on this excellent program!
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 2, 2003
    #11
  12. zbzbzb

    Ron Recer Guest

    From: (zbzbzb)
    I have had good luck using PhotoStitch unless the scene includes moving
    water/clouds. With those kinds of movement there is no point where the frames
    match exactly and you can almost alway see where the seam is located.

    Ron
    Mercedes, TX
     
    Ron Recer, Dec 2, 2003
    #12
  13. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    I have had good luck using PhotoStitch unless the scene includes moving
    PhotoStitch appeared to do just fine for stiching but not at blending. I can
    always see the darkening of the seems if it is say including less detailed
    areas like skys. Panorama Factory is night and day over PhotoSticth though it
    does take much longer to finish joining. So far it looks like an outstanding
    program. I'm satisfied.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 2, 2003
    #13
  14. zbzbzb

    Joe Guest


    Here's an example of the visible seams I'm referring to:

    http://www.joekaz.net/photos/panoramas/field/html/field_031031.html

    It's really not bad at all, and I don't even notice unless I
    really look for it, but I can see 3 areas of a darker blue in
    the sky where the separate photos were blended. I could
    probably improve this by playing with brightness falloff.

    I do have the latest version. I usually start with the
    wizard, the adjust the results if needed - which is usually
    ver little. And all my pans are taken with a handheld
    camera, not using a tripod, and that's part of the problem.
     
    Joe, Dec 3, 2003
    #14
  15. zbzbzb

    Joe Guest


    Panorama Factory is great for dealing with those moving clouds
    and people. (But I never tried it with moving water). In
    the fine tuning mode, the overlap is divided into a grid. You
    can manually adjust the overlap in each tile of the grid, so
    if a person in the overlap area moved, you might give 5 tiles
    some extra adjustment, and leave the rest alone.
     
    Joe, Dec 3, 2003
    #15
  16. zbzbzb

    Ron Recer Guest

    From: Joe
    I don't believe the problem I have with clouds and moving water is software
    related. Unfortunately, both clouds and moving water are not the same from one
    instant to another so there is never a exact match from one frame to another.

    Frequently clouds are changing slowly and are not always a big problem.
    Streams and rivers in the foreground are always a problem for me. For example,
    I tried a panorama where the Jefferson and Madison Rivers join to form the
    Missouri River. Everything looks great except the water. Those current and
    wave patterns just won't hold still for you. <gr>

    Ron
    Mercedes, TX
     
    Ron Recer, Dec 3, 2003
    #16
  17. zbzbzb

    Mark Johnson Guest


    Yeah, the problem that factory and panotools had was not the histogram
    adjustment to a particular 'anchor photo', nor the blending and
    distorting and pushing everything around. It was in that blend area
    not appearing dark, so much as soft. And I think that had to do with
    how wide your overlap area was.

    I haven't seen the latest version.

    I don't know about factory, but panotools and PTGUI was free. I assume
    it still is. And it does a great job. The help just isn't that
    straightforward. But if you 'google search' on the problem you have,
    you can find the answers. I mean, by comparison, I've got some Oly
    digicams. And the help on those is so bad that the only time you touch
    the manual and documentation is to pick it up so you can get to the
    camera at the bottom of the box.
     
    Mark Johnson, Dec 3, 2003
    #17
  18. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    PTGUI is not free anymore and I tried Panotools and it isn't worth the time
    trying to figure that mess out. Panorama Factory is as simple as opening the
    images and clicking one button. That's the kind of performance I was looking
    for. Panotools is a bunch of very confusing plugins. I'd rather pay the money
    for a completed program that is simple to use.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 3, 2003
    #18
  19. zbzbzb

    Mark Johnson Guest

    Well, you'd use PTGUI with panotools. And it's very easy. You
    establish the 'morph' points, the identity points. You select the
    image you want for the standard histogram. And generate. It couldn't
    be easier.
     
    Mark Johnson, Dec 4, 2003
    #19
  20. zbzbzb

    zbzbzb Guest

    Well, you'd use PTGUI with panotools. And it's very easy. You
    It is the same price as The Panorama Factory and Panorama Factory is even
    easier, at least for what I want.
     
    zbzbzb, Dec 4, 2003
    #20
    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.