DSLRUsers.com

This is where PanoXxxWiz sofware will not do good enough and where Photoshop comes with power. Three images merged, ready to large print. Nobody in my office under 100% magnification can tell where seals are.

Regards,

K.Polak

Wow, very skilful.
Where is the krpolak Panorama tutorial coming out?
Do you have any beginners tips, I have tried PS photomerge but without much success , I am now inspired to persevere.

Cheers - Greg

Here comes tutorial:

1. Prepare separatly each image in 16 bits mode. Remove noise, sharp it, work curves, check distortions ect. Save all. It is important sicne next step doesnt work with 16 bit images, so lets squize all juices here.

2. Photoshop -> Automate -> Photomerge

Play with perspective and cylindrical settings for the best match. Dont forget check on 'keep as separate layers'

3. Once is done you will have nice set of layers. Some of them will need fine adjustment such as moving, transform etc to get the best result.

4. Then apply masks and make a magic. Brush size and softnes depends on detail.

5. Dont forget to clean up your swap file partition before since you will need a lot of memory

Regards,

K.Polak PS Forgot to mention, this was shot from hand

Hi Kpolak
This is certainly a very good stitching job, but I need to ask, why make a panorama using 3 images when you can get the same result using a wider lens? I realise that the perspective would be different with a wider lens, but I would have thought that correcting perspective in photoshop would have been easier then stitching.
I guess my idea of a panorama is a photo of 150 degrees or more.

phillipb wrote:Hi Kpolak
This is certainly a very good stitching job, but I need to ask, why make a panorama using 3 images when you can get the same result using a wider lens? I realise that the perspective would be different with a wider lens, but I would have thought that correcting perspective in photoshop would have been easier then stitching.
I guess my idea of a panorama if a photo of 150 degrees or more.

I guess that there are two reasons to use panorama techniques
- to capture a wide or tall scene
- to get more megapixels for a given image (i.e. more detail)

While on the face of it, Krystian's picture could have been captured using a normal lens in portrait orientation, the resulting image probably has at least twice the resolution. Of course there is little point for web display, but for printing it can provide much better images

You are exactly right Leek. This was shot with 50mm. Also wider lens changes perspective, whereas in this case I wanted to have it rather flat.

Stiching took me maybe 15-20 minutes

Regards,

K.Polak

leek wrote: - to get more megapixels for a given image (i.e. more detail)

This is quite a common reason to do it. I took 9 shots (3x3) at 85 mm, when I could have taken 1 shot at around 24mm. The difference is the resulting image is over 40 megapixels, instead of 8.

Panos aren't just for long aspect ratio photos

- Rog

rog wrote:Panos aren't just for long aspect ratio photos

Actually a panorama is a "long aspect ratio" image!

It seems some people have got themselves confused about the differences between panoramic photography and the techniques of stitching multiple images together!

Pano technique doesn't necessarily involve composite stitching. Consider the use of a 6x17 camera.
Conversely, composite stitching doesn't necessarily involve panoramic images. Consider krpolak's example here.

I would be interested in seeing this image again....

Cheers
Gecko

For some reason i cannot see the image.

Craig

CraigVTR wrote:For some reason i cannot see the image.

Craig

Me either

krpolak is no longer part of this community. He might have removed this image from his hosting site.