Chuck
I'm guessing that there is nothing smart about the software to avoid this, but
what I mean is,
If the bird is moving over a stationary landscape, making the images coincide
at the moving bird will distort the landscape which is not moving; it would be
impossible for it not to be so. The landscape is at different positions
relative to the moving bird so each point be in the same position relative to
the bird requires some distortion of it.
I saw this with my Madeira panorama. There were a couple of points that were
similar and Photoshop blended the images together at one of those points, not
the other, thereby distorting the sea beneath that point.
Have I explained myself with sufficient clarity and persuasion? :-) If not, it
might require diagrams . . .
Chris
On 24 Apr 2012, at 14:37, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I don't understand what you meant by: "if a moving bird were
> "frozen" in the panorama, it's likely that there was some compression
> of other parts of the scene." I don't understand the use of
> "compression" here.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|