At 09:43 AM 7/11/99 +0000, you wrote:
>At 22:44 7/10/99 , Denton Taylor wrote:
>
>>Have you thought of doing this in software? There are a lot of
>>panorama/stitcher software packages that will do this easily and without the
>>use of a shift lens.
>
>I hit a couple of "pano" sites and read about how it is done using a
>leveled pano-head rotating around the lens node. It seems the current
>method is to scan the reversals or negatives and then "stitch" them
>together with software, sometimes in 360 degree panoramics. There wasn't
>too much about making an actual print, but presume this must be done in
>very high resolution and then printed on a hi-res photo printer. I may
>ultimately take the path you're suggesting, and will get a picture CD done
>with the film developing so the images can also be manipulated digitally.
>A couple of programs found on the pano sites hit seemed quite pricey.
>Don't have a scanner or photo printer (this could eventually become the
>excuse^H^H^H^H^H^Hjustification). Looked at some of the long ones on your
>site (360 immersion: spinning around in them is cool!) and know now I will
>have to continue researching the hardware and software.
You can scan 3x5 prints as well as negs or slides.
They're not pricey, I don't think. LivePicture's PhotoVista and Panavue's
Visual Stitcher are both around $50. I think LP just went bankrupt, or
reorganized, or something.
>Something came to mind looking at the smaller panoramics earlier using some
>of the OM gear already on hand if it would work (35mm shift, standard
>tripod and possibly the 2x teleconverter [no 1.4x . . . yet]): cutting
>three prints and physically grafting them together instead of "stitching"
>scanned images.
>
>At 01:24 7/11/99 , Acer Victoria wrote:
>>In fact, I think you can do a panorama sans special software--just use any
>>photo editing utility, copy and past using a grid, and then airbrush
>>slightly if there's a definitive edge visible.
>
>This poses a problem of what to do with the seams even if the prints can be
>lined up perfectly (Acer mentions the digital equivalent). I have seen
>panoramic paintings using three canvases in three frames hung side by side
>using a wider middle and narrower side canvases. It gives the impression
>of a window frame if they're hung correctly, but I've never seen this done
>with photographs, only with paintings. The brain correlates the three
>canvases nicely.
Acer is also right, it can be done in photoshop. In fact I have done my Noblex
images both ways. (I have to scan them in two passes). Sometimes stitching
software does it right the first time; ocasionally Photoshop does it better. If
you choose the iamge editor way, perhaps the shift lens will do better.
________________________________
Regards,
Denton Taylor
Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com.
Panoramas and Immersive Imaging at
www.threehundredsixty.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|