If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
Hi.
I have been doing large format photography for going on 2 decades. I have also been doing wildlife photography, first with 35mm then digital. Thus, I often carry both digital wildlife and 4x5 gear on a hike (up to 70 pounds). That gets real tiring and limits my range (and, obviously, I'm getting older). I want an alternative without giving up anything ;-). I switched to a Toho field camera (3 pounds) from heavier cameras several years ago, but it is still too much weight doing both digital wildlife and 4x5 (I still love the Toho though). Mosaicking many digital image frames as intrigued me for some time, and I have been experimenting with the methods, from field to computer processing. Like large format view cameras and methods, there is much to learn. But my experience so far is that digital mosaics can equal and surpass 4x5 drum scanned film in many applications, including large depth of field imaging requiring tilts on a view camera. And I can get images in the field faster and under conditions not suitable for large format photography (like wind). I've written up some of my experiences in this article and compare the digital results to drum scanned 4x5 film images: Large Digital Mosaics as a Substitute for Large Format Film http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/large_mosaics Comments welcome. Roger Clark my photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
Hi. I've written up some of my experiences in this article and compare the digital results to drum scanned 4x5 film images: Large Digital Mosaics as a Substitute for Large Format Film http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/large_mosaics Comments welcome. Roger Clark Impressive results, Roger. Thanks for the write up! Can you elaborate on how to deal with moving clouds and the like? I assume you 'scan' the scene moving with the clouds. Even then, you might have several possible positions that a given cloud wind up at. Also, I'm unclear as to how do you reconcile those clouds, or other moving subjects like blowing grass/flowers/etc., that cross frame boundries. With the grass, you could wind up with dozens of subjects blowing this way and that, many out of phase with each other. I'd think that some would wind up blurred, sheared, or distorted in the final image. Any plans to build an automated scanning tripod head? Something that could quickly and accurately step the camera across the scene, stopping just long enough to trigger the shutter before slewing to the next location. I'd think that camera data-writing lag would be the limiting speed factor. Write lag is a serious PITA with my P/S digicam when I take taken large numbers of panno shots to stitch. I'm sure curent DSLRs are much better.... -Greg |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
Greg Campbell wrote:
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: Hi. I've written up some of my experiences in this article and compare the digital results to drum scanned 4x5 film images: Large Digital Mosaics as a Substitute for Large Format Film http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/large_mosaics Comments welcome. Roger Clark Impressive results, Roger. Thanks for the write up! Thanks, Greg. Can you elaborate on how to deal with moving clouds and the like? I assume you 'scan' the scene moving with the clouds. Even then, you might have several possible positions that a given cloud wind up at. Let's look at this image as an example (a 4x5 film image): http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...01a2-600b.html The foreground flowers are in a shadow from an overhead cloud. I would generally do this image in a mosaic by first knowing my f/stop and shutter speed, placing the camera on manual (except autofocus), and starting image frames at the bottom and work up. At some point, the cloud shadow edge will catch up to my framing. I'll try and frame fast for that row, hoping the final merge can be done reasonably (e.g. do not use mirror lock up). Whether or not it works is dependent on the distance and speed of the shadow edge. I had to break off several mosaics this summer when doing wildflower images like these because the cloud shadow movement was too fast. But the many times I've almost clicked the shutter with 4x5 film, and had to break off due to wind far exceeds a typical field outing with 4x5. The gallery page above is a good illustration: I spend 5 hours to get that image, waiting for the cloud shadow, then waiting for a calm in the wind (and the final image still has some flower movement in the distance). Another factor I found difficult is that the light intensity in the cloud shadow changes and that can cause difficulty with the mosaic, although the software does pretty well with matching levels. When it gets too extreme, the join region becomes noticeable. For the distant clouds, they move slow enough that I haven't noticed them as a problem. Also, I'm unclear as to how do you reconcile those clouds, or other moving subjects like blowing grass/flowers/etc., that cross frame boundries. With the grass, you could wind up with dozens of subjects blowing this way and that, many out of phase with each other. I'd think that some would wind up blurred, sheared, or distorted in the final image. For prominent subject blowing in the wind, I'll make a point to include extra frames to center that one (e.g. a flower), even framing it several times to catch the scene in several positions swaying in the wind. I've always had enough frames and overlap to match. In the image on the web page, there were several places where there was misalignment due to movement. But by changing the place where one scene merges with the next I was able to always get a good match. I also wait for a local calm in the wind, thus a foreground flower may be still and a wind gust is coming (and flowers further away are moving). I'll frame until the wind gets to my framing, then pause and wait. Once things are still again, I'll continue. It seems that everything goes back to the same position. Maybe I've just been lucky. ;-) But I think overlap is the key. I generally do 50% overlap, then more when wind is a factor. Any plans to build an automated scanning tripod head? Something that could quickly and accurately step the camera across the scene, stopping just long enough to trigger the shutter before slewing to the next location. I'd think that camera data-writing lag would be the limiting speed factor. Write lag is a serious PITA with my P/S digicam when I take taken large numbers of panno shots to stitch. I'm sure curent DSLRs are much better.... I don't think an automated head would be an improvement, and it would be more weight. If I do mirror lock-up, which takes 3 seconds, then the frame time is about 4 or 5 seconds. My DSLR (1D mark II, which writes quite fast) has never filled the buffer). If I don't use mirror lockup, I can frame every second or two. I have come close to filing the buffer when writing raw plus jpeg. The other issue I have yet to try is working with a split density filter. It will take careful planning for the bright/dark intensity line, then what to do above that line? And how will the software act when it tries to combine the scenes? Fortunately with DSLRs, the dynamic range is huge compared to film, so it has not been an issue, yet. Roger |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
In article ,
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote: Comments welcome. I don't like the color balance of the ground-too green-yellow, and the clouds look artificially flat & seem to loose detail. -- Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back. www.gregblankphoto.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
Roger
Fascinating and very impressive. Makes me wonder whether the future of LF is digital backs with an array of digital sensors, and the stitching software in firmware. Stewart Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: Hi. I have been doing large format photography for going on 2 decades. I have also been doing wildlife photography, first with 35mm then digital. Thus, I often carry both digital wildlife and 4x5 gear on a hike (up to 70 pounds). That gets real tiring and limits my range (and, obviously, I'm getting older). I want an alternative without giving up anything ;-). I switched to a Toho field camera (3 pounds) from heavier cameras several years ago, but it is still too much weight doing both digital wildlife and 4x5 (I still love the Toho though). Mosaicking many digital image frames as intrigued me for some time, and I have been experimenting with the methods, from field to computer processing. Like large format view cameras and methods, there is much to learn. But my experience so far is that digital mosaics can equal and surpass 4x5 drum scanned film in many applications, including large depth of field imaging requiring tilts on a view camera. And I can get images in the field faster and under conditions not suitable for large format photography (like wind). I've written up some of my experiences in this article and compare the digital results to drum scanned 4x5 film images: Large Digital Mosaics as a Substitute for Large Format Film http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/large_mosaics Comments welcome. Roger Clark my photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 08:56:09 -0400, Robert Feinman
wrote: Combining multiple images can be used with film cameras too. Once the film is scanned then all the steps are the same as with digital. I've been doing this for years to produce panoramas where my objective is a larger field of view (up to 360) rather than higher resolution. The ease of digital has made panoramas using this technique a bit of a fad these days. Some cameras even have built in software to assist with the overlaps. Indeed, it can be done with [scanned] film, as we both know. Although in my case I've been stitching the images laboriously, by hand, in Photoshop -- which is slow and never as seamless as what Scott W and Roger routinely achieve. Not to get into a big philosophical debate, but I find these super resolution image somewhat off putting. The fact that so much fine detail is seen in objects in the distance makes it look unnatural and makes one focus on the detail rather than on the overall scene. Silly. Now you're claiming the *existence* of all this detail detracts from the image. But again, this level of detail is comparable to what you'd get from a well-shot and well-scanned LF frame. The "GagaPixl" project represents the bleeding edge of that technology: http://www.gigapxl.org/ rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
In article ,
Robert Feinman wrote: Not to get into a big philosophical debate, but I find these super resolution image somewhat off putting. The fact that so much fine detail is seen in objects in the distance makes it look unnatural and makes one focus on the detail rather than on the overall scene. Conventional photographers who use film-based unsharp masking give me the same funny feeling. I completely agree, does anyone remember a few years back there was a company from Japan marketing super high resolution Laser imaged scenery in calendars, brilliant saturated colors, and very sharp images. Problem was after a few minutes the images lost all appeal. I find much color imagery to be this way-the photographer only concentrating on color or technique. And composition and a sense light rather lacking. I am willing to accept this look as a different type of aesthetic effect, but it requires a mental adjustment. Like reading blue prints. -- Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back. www.gregblankphoto.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
In article ,
Raphael Bustin wrote: On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 08:56:09 -0400, Robert Feinman wrote: Combining multiple images can be used with film cameras too. Once the film is scanned then all the steps are the same as with digital. I've been doing this for years to produce panoramas where my objective is a larger field of view (up to 360) rather than higher resolution. The ease of digital has made panoramas using this technique a bit of a fad these days. Some cameras even have built in software to assist with the overlaps. Indeed, it can be done with [scanned] film, as we both know. Although in my case I've been stitching the images laboriously, by hand, in Photoshop -- which is slow and never as seamless as what Scott W and Roger routinely achieve. Not to get into a big philosophical debate, but I find these super resolution image somewhat off putting. The fact that so much fine detail is seen in objects in the distance makes it look unnatural and makes one focus on the detail rather than on the overall scene. Silly. Now you're claiming the *existence* of all this detail detracts from the image. But again, this level of detail is comparable to what you'd get from a well-shot and well-scanned LF frame. The "GagaPixl" project represents the bleeding edge of that technology: http://www.gigapxl.org/ rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com Problem is it becomes less about -- Reality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back. www.gregblankphoto.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Digital mosaics as a replacement of the large format view camera
Greg "_" wrote:
In article , "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote: Comments welcome. I don't like the color balance of the ground-too green-yellow, and the clouds look artificially flat & seem to loose detail. color balance: I use a color managed work-flow on a calibrated CRT monitor. Some RGB values: red green blue The white flowers in the foreground: 28656 29555 29941 distant white flowers: 27371 27628 29812 Distant snow on mountains: 31740 31354 30069 The late season snow should be reddish as it has a lot of dust mixed in. There is some pollution in the air from certain west cost cities, reddening the clouds on the horizon. The white flowers are slightly bluish, due to the blue sky contribution. The soil is quite red, so the fields will look green + red = yellow. That is the way it really was. clouds look artificially flat & seem to loose detail: Are you using a calibrated monitor? The cloud intensity values range from ~17,000 to 32,639 in the full resolution 16-bit image. Roger |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Seeking advise on good digital camera | aNdY | Digital Photography | 44 | June 11th 06 05:13 PM |
Erwin Puts On The Fundamental Differences Between Film and Digital Imaging | Jeremy | 35mm Photo Equipment | 21 | March 19th 06 06:52 AM |
NY Times: "Digital Moves to Top-Tier Cameras" | Jeremy | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | February 22nd 06 11:15 AM |
High resolution photos from a digital camera. | Scott W | 35mm Photo Equipment | 78 | November 17th 05 03:26 PM |
Focal plane vs. leaf shutters in MF SLRs | KM | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 724 | December 7th 04 09:58 AM |