Frank may be right about the vignetting. I used to run into occasional
problems using CS3 for panos but find that CS5 seems to do much better..
except that I frequently override its choice of alignment method. I
usually get best results choosing/forcing "reposition". Sometimes it
does so well that I find it a little spooky as I'm not sure how it does
it. For example, I have a pano of Loch Fyne in Scotland where a large
bird appears in most of the frames, obviously in a different place in
each. I expected to have to clean that up afterward. Much to my
surprise the bird appears only once in the final image.
If you'd like to send me the original images (or even a downsized set)
I'll run them through CS5 and you can see if it does a better job.
Chuck Norcutt
On 3/8/2012 5:53 AM, Frank Wijsmuller wrote:
> Nice. I like the transparancy and colors of the water. Did you use a
> polarizer?
>
> I presume the dark bands are from slight vignetting of the lens, you could
> remove that before stitching?
>
> You could try autostitch (.net) as an alternative. It sometimes renders
> different pano's, especially with wider lenses. Sometimes Photoshop (I use
> CS3 as well) does weird things and the perspective gets compromised.
> Autostitch might be better at 'equalizing' the sky as well. I've got mixed
> experiences with both CS3 and Autostitch, so it is good to try both and see
> what works for you.
>
> Best, Frank.
>
>
>
> Op donderdag 8 maart 2012 schreef Nathan Wajsman het volgende:
>
>> .., although I note the dark bands in the blue sky--I wonder if this is an
>> artifact of less-than-perfect alignment. The tool is Photoshop CS3.
>> Speaking of which, are there other panorama tools that work better than
>> Photoshop?
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|