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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
Ray Fischer wrote:
One can stitch together images from a 4x5 camera as well. Well yes you could but a 4 x 5 camera has pretty great resolution with just one photo. Kind of hard to imaging someone wanting to take a lot of 4 x 5 photos just to stitch them together. Scott |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
"Scott W" writes:
Måns Rullgård wrote: "Eatmorepies" writes: If people are moving around too much they might end up in several places in the picture. A technique that produces interesting pictures. Stand on the beach and take photos of a child running into the sea, pan the camera. Stich them together and get the child in 4 or 5 different places. If that's the effect you want, then sure. If you don't want it, better be careful. You could also use the technique to entirely remove moving objects from a photo. One of the things I want to try sometime it to take a lot of photos of a very busy road and by combining the right photos together remove all the cars but leave the people on the sidewalks, I think it might make for an interesting photo. That's an interesting idea. It's a theme that has many variations. -- Måns Rullgård |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
"Scott W" wrote in message ups.com... SNIP One of the things I want to try sometime it to take a lot of photos of a very busy road and by combining the right photos together remove all the cars but leave the people on the sidewalks, I think it might make for an interesting photo. Stitching can accomplish that, just shoot the images in the opposite order/direction to the traffic flow. Bart |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:40:27 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
wrote: Dave Cohen wrote: ... I must be losing it in my old age. So I'm standing alongside this guy who is carefully composing an image of this beautiful old church and is using the swing and tilt feature of his 4x5 to include the steeple. Now using the technique described in this post, what exactly do I do, get close to the subject and take a shot of a few bricks (or stones at a time), climb up a ladder to shoot the steeple, then stitch the whole thing together. Since I'm using dial-up, I can't view the sample. I'm confident it's very good and I have stitched landscape views myself, so I'm both aware of and certainly not opposed to stitching as a useful technique, I just think the rational of this post is missing something. Dave Cohen I believe that Scott cover that in his original message: " I am trying to say is that some of the limitations that many people believe digital cameras have are not real limitations at all." Only the solution in that case eliminated one limitation while it produced another limitation, namely the inability to control things in a non-static environment while taking multiple shots. But the technique does work well with distant landscapes or still-lifes. -Rich If Blu-Ray and HD-DVD require players to be hooked-up to the internet to obtain "permission" for playback (like the DIVX horror of the late 1990s) people shouldn't buy or rent the players OR any of the disks. That incarnation of a high definition format MUST die. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
"Rich" wrote:
"Joseph wrote: Dave Cohen wrote: ... I must be losing it in my old age. So I'm standing alongside this guy who is carefully composing an image of this beautiful old church and is using the swing and tilt feature of his 4x5 to include the steeple. Now using the technique described in this post, what exactly do I do, get close to the subject and take a shot of a few bricks (or stones at a time), climb up a ladder to shoot the steeple, then stitch the whole thing together. Since I'm using dial-up, I can't view the sample. I'm confident it's very good and I have stitched landscape views myself, so I'm both aware of and certainly not opposed to stitching as a useful technique, I just think the rational of this post is missing something. Dave Cohen I believe that Scott cover that in his original message: " I am trying to say is that some of the limitations that many people believe digital cameras have are not real limitations at all." Only the solution in that case eliminated one limitation while it produced another limitation, namely the inability to control things in a non-static environment while taking multiple shots. But the technique does work well with distant landscapes or still-lifes. But landscapes and still lifes are the main use of large format, so digital stitching is actually quite a practical alternative. My current fantasy is to figure out how to do 3-frame panoramas warped to rectilinear projection with the added twist that the left and right frames are taken with a longer focal length to minimize image quality loss associated with the warping. I just acquired Lee Frost's "Panoramic Photography", which has a lot of GX617 and Xpan shots, and I think I prefer rectilinear to cylindrical projection for a lot of things... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
David J. Littleboy wrote: But landscapes and still lifes are the main use of large format, so digital stitching is actually quite a practical alternative. My current fantasy is to figure out how to do 3-frame panoramas warped to rectilinear projection with the added twist that the left and right frames are taken with a longer focal length to minimize image quality loss associated with the warping. This should be doable but I don't believe the software I am using will handle it, it would be nice. For now I just shoot more frames and over resolve in the center. I just acquired Lee Frost's "Panoramic Photography", which has a lot of GX617 and Xpan shots, and I think I prefer rectilinear to cylindrical projection for a lot of things... I tend to stick to rectilinear when shot is not too wide angle, if it goes past around 90 degrees it starts to look very odd. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
Scott W wrote:
A while back someone referenced Ken Rockwell's article regarding the quality of digital vs. film. Ken decided to compare what he was shooting for digital, a Nikon D70, to a 4 x 5 camera. But a D70 and a 4 x 5 large format camera are not meant for the same uses, so this seem like a bit of an odd comparison to make, at least to me. A 4 x 5 camera is used for cases where one is taking the time to get a high resolution photo, if this same time is used with a digital camera you can also get a high resolution photos with it. Yesterday I took a 95 MP photo using my digital camera, here is a link to a overview photo along with a small 100% crop from the photo. http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/51841148/original The photos is 15730 by 6000 pixels, just short of a 100 MP photo, it is a view of the small beach in front of the King Kamehameha hotel, taken off the Kailua Pier in Kona Hawaii. For those who have high speed internet and want to see the whole photo here is a link to that, I compressed it fairly hard to fit it into a 10 MB file, at normal compression it takes about 27 MB. http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/51841619/original The photo is of course stitched, it is a way to get a lot of pixels using a digital camera. This photos does not even come close to what some others have done, I have seen a 2.5 GP photo. But the high resolution stitched photos that I have seen to date have been of pretty static scenes, I wanted something with a bit of a dynamic feel to it, something where people are doing things in the photo. I am not trying to tell people that this is a better way to take photos then using a large format camera, all that I am trying to say is that some of the limitations that many people believe digital cameras have are not real limitations at all. The tools to do the stitching are getting better all the time. I also use a special tripod head that is designed to take these kind of photos, it cost a fair bit but less then one good wide angle lens. BTW the time to take the 36 photos used in the stitching was 1 minute and 23 seconds. There are many others that have done far more with stitching that I have, I thought I would just share the kind of photo that I am takeing using this method. Scott I completely agree. As proof of the difference in purpose: When was the last time you saw someone taking pictures with a 4 x 5 handheld? Quite different uses. Since light changes pretty rapidly, it behooves one taking panos to do so quickly if possible. Saves time in the stitching process. -- Ron Hunter |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
Måns Rullgård wrote:
"Scott W" writes: The photo is of course stitched, it is a way to get a lot of pixels using a digital camera. This photos does not even come close to what some others have done, I have seen a 2.5 GP photo. But the high resolution stitched photos that I have seen to date have been of pretty static scenes, I wanted something with a bit of a dynamic feel to it, something where people are doing things in the photo. If people are moving around too much they might end up in several places in the picture. Quite true, which is why most panos are of the landscape variety. -- Ron Hunter |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
Dave Cohen wrote:
"Scott W" wrote in message oups.com... A while back someone referenced Ken Rockwell's article regarding the quality of digital vs. film. Ken decided to compare what he was shooting for digital, a Nikon D70, to a 4 x 5 camera. But a D70 and a 4 x 5 large format camera are not meant for the same uses, so this seem like a bit of an odd comparison to make, at least to me. A 4 x 5 camera is used for cases where one is taking the time to get a high resolution photo, if this same time is used with a digital camera you can also get a high resolution photos with it. Yesterday I took a 95 MP photo using my digital camera, here is a link to a overview photo along with a small 100% crop from the photo. http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/51841148/original The photos is 15730 by 6000 pixels, just short of a 100 MP photo, it is a view of the small beach in front of the King Kamehameha hotel, taken off the Kailua Pier in Kona Hawaii. For those who have high speed internet and want to see the whole photo here is a link to that, I compressed it fairly hard to fit it into a 10 MB file, at normal compression it takes about 27 MB. http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/51841619/original The photo is of course stitched, it is a way to get a lot of pixels using a digital camera. This photos does not even come close to what some others have done, I have seen a 2.5 GP photo. But the high resolution stitched photos that I have seen to date have been of pretty static scenes, I wanted something with a bit of a dynamic feel to it, something where people are doing things in the photo. I am not trying to tell people that this is a better way to take photos then using a large format camera, all that I am trying to say is that some of the limitations that many people believe digital cameras have are not real limitations at all. The tools to do the stitching are getting better all the time. I also use a special tripod head that is designed to take these kind of photos, it cost a fair bit but less then one good wide angle lens. BTW the time to take the 36 photos used in the stitching was 1 minute and 23 seconds. There are many others that have done far more with stitching that I have, I thought I would just share the kind of photo that I am takeing using this method. Scott I must be losing it in my old age. So I'm standing alongside this guy who is carefully composing an image of this beautiful old church and is using the swing and tilt feature of his 4x5 to include the steeple. Now using the technique described in this post, what exactly do I do, get close to the subject and take a shot of a few bricks (or stones at a time), climb up a ladder to shoot the steeple, then stitch the whole thing together. Since I'm using dial-up, I can't view the sample. I'm confident it's very good and I have stitched landscape views myself, so I'm both aware of and certainly not opposed to stitching as a useful technique, I just think the rational of this post is missing something. Dave Cohen Taking pictures to be stitched involves a lot of forethought, if it is to be done right, and a nice tripod with pano head is also valuable. Unfortunately, I am not able to carry things like that around any more. The perspective issue can be handled, somewhat, by good stitching software. -- Ron Hunter |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
High resolution photos from a digital camera.
In article ,
David J. Littleboy wrote: My current fantasy is to figure out how to do 3-frame panoramas warped to rectilinear projection with the added twist that the left and right frames are taken with a longer focal length to minimize image quality loss associated with the warping. Panotools will do this. Just tell it about the different lenses and you're good to go. The best way I've found to date to use Panotools is via the Hugin front end (hugin.sourceforge.net), which also has the advantage of being free. I just acquired Lee Frost's "Panoramic Photography", which has a lot of GX617 and Xpan shots, and I think I prefer rectilinear to cylindrical projection for a lot of things... I suspect it very much depends on your field of view. As you approach 180 degrees, rectilinear starts looking nasty fast. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
High resolution...through digital interpolation... | Des | Digital Photography | 256 | April 18th 05 02:51 PM |
Price War Hits Digital Photos | MrPepper11 | Digital Photography | 3 | March 19th 05 12:32 AM |
digital camera storage conundrum - Answered! | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | January 12th 05 02:51 AM |
FA: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1 Digital camera with Leica 12X optical zoom lens | Marvin Culpepper | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 15th 04 01:05 AM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |