Late in responding, but the subjects of two of the linked images will
explain my absence.
Here's a collection of stitched panoramas all of which were composited using
PS CS5, leaving PS to do what it chose.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/phemy/Beinn+Wyvis+IR+-+Crop.jpg.html was
exposed aperture-priority, given the overall even lighting, but the next two
were exposed manually (the same exposure for all frames):
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/phemy/Bryce+Canyon.jpg.html
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/phemy/Monument_Valley.jpg.html in which I
notice one glitch on the horizon - I will leave it to you to find!
It would not have occurred to me to trust PS to level the exposures across
the frames until I read the earlier posts in this thread - perhaps I need to
loosen up?
All three images are appropriately posted on the LUG gallery, despite the
use of the E-5 - I used the Leica-branded Vario Elmar for all :-)
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 29 April 2012 22:00
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] (OM) OT image stitching / panoramas
I forgot to ask an important question. My 5D when in auto mode and when
pointed in the general direction of the sun will end up with blown
highlights unless negative exposure compensation is applied ranging
(usually) from 1/3 to 1 full stop. The amount is variable depending on
angle from the sun but is typically about -2/3 stop.
So, if I'm shooting a pano in AP mode and one end of the scene needs a
-2/3 stop correction to keep from blowing the highlights I assume I'm
supposed to do that. The question is what do I do with the remaining
exposures? Do I leave the same compensation in place, remove it
unconditionally or adjust it for the next exposure (which might be -1/3)?
From what you've said so far I'm guessing that I leave the meter to its own
designs except for what may be any necessary override to avoid blown
highlights.
Chuck Norcutt
On 4/29/2012 4:49 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I don't foresee that I'll be converted to your method but I will have
> to give it a try one of these days by shooting the same pano in manual
> and aperture priority mode so I can make a direct comparison.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> On 4/29/2012 2:39 PM, Mike Lazzari wrote:
>>> It works but don't you think you've lost something? Based on the
>>> shutter speeds the three scenes should exhibit overall gradients of
>>> 1,
>>> 1-1/3 and 2-2/3 stops. But they don't.
>> Lost? I've gained data in the areas that would have been blown. And
>> frankly IMHO a steep gradient in an image tends to look unnatural, a
>> la polarizer. The gradient you're talking about does exist en sitio
>> and also would exist in the photo if shot in manual mode and if using
>> technology able to capture the full range of data. My E620 isn't there.
>> So we have to compress the data. Kinda like our eyes do. I probably
>> could have shot one of those pans in manual mode but why bother? And
>> I prefer the compressed image with a reduced gradient.
>>
>> Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
