Help - Exposure And Stitching - Matching Colours

EdinburghGary

EdinburghGary

Reply not Report
Messages
19,271
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
How? :)

Lets say I have 6 shots, and at one end of my "panorama" I have a dark cloudy sky, and at the other end, the clouds have opened up and the sun is shining...

I am basically finding that with some of my panoramic attempts, you can see "bands" which I believe to be the difference in light etc from the various exposures...

STUCK :(

Gary.
 
It is very important Gary that you decide on a single exposure that will suit the entire scene before you take the photographs otherwise this is the problem you will have. You can try and adjust to similar values in PS but really it will be hard, hard work and is better sorted in camera.
 
Thanks for the reply Gary. I am confused unfortunately (not hard :D) - what do you mean decide on a single exposure? I think I might have read about something called "Exposure Lock" ages ago....is this what you are talking about? I do lock the focus, but haven't a clue how to lock exposure on the D200, sucks as I think I have a potential cracker but the differences in light are too great...
 
ok, so let the software do it. I thought it can be more of a manual process
 
For a single exposure just use manual mode and set it and leave it.
 
visualisetheworld said:
ok, so let the software do it. I thought it can be more of a manual process
Click to expand...


The photoshop works a treat to an extent, I need the balance of light across the images to be even though. Gary has mentioned my exposure has changed per shot, so I have an issue with multiple and different exposures. My question should probably now read, how to match exposure across multiple shots after they have been taken??
 
Sorry Gary, I should have said that little clearer. Here is how I do it but other methods are available in deciding final manual exposure:

-Set Camera to Aperture priority mode.
-Take exposures reading from scene as if you were taking panorama for real to decide -"average" or "preferred" shutter speed.
-Change to manual mode and input these settings.
-shoot panorama.

If you are feeling flash you could bracket exposures.

Is that a better explanation?
 
Thanks Gary I think I understand. For this particular shot I want to use the 50mm on F1.8 handheld (bright daylight). Not sure how to "take exposures" though, what I normally do is take a picture, and if blown, I reduce the exposure compensation until no blown areas in the image. Once I have the exposure the way I want, I then get the focus locked, then I normally leave it on Aperture Priority and then continue the other shots of the panorama...

If I move to manual mode I will need to choose an Aperture, a Shutter Speed, an Exposure Compensation? Not sure if this is how to "take exposures?"

Thanks and sorry for being a clueless noob :D

Gary.
 
For what i know (not that much) set the camera to Av and set the aperture to F1.8 (or what ever you want. Then look at the shutter speed.

Then turn the camera to Manual mode and set the aperture to F1.8 (or what ever you chose in Manual mode) and then select the same shutter speed as it said before.

Then take the photos and the exporures will be he same (therotically)
 
Gary

I have no prob in giving you further explanations because your enthusiasm is nothing short of amazing. I am almost suspecting drug inducement! :eek: ;)


Your camera has an onboard exposure meter - USE IT!

When you set to Aperture Priority (to control the depth of field), compose the shot and press lightly on the shutter you will notice in your viewfinder an exposure that the camera is telling you it is going to use. Do not ignore that, instead point at bright and dark bits and see how it thinks the scene looks in terms of it's limited dynamic range.

Tell it YOUR decision and take the shot. Take several versions if you have the opportunity and take the time to study your decisions and the resultant images. You will learn and improve. Simple really.

Oh, and show the results here!
 
The Panorama Factory, by Smokey City Design is excellent, allowing mismatched exposures to be corrected as they are stitched. Also allows fine tuning, and pulling, and push of the 'join' area of the stitch.

Have a look see - its the best i've found so far

http://www.panoramafactory.com/
 
HIMUPNORTH said:
Gary

I have no prob in giving you further explanations because your enthusiasm is nothing short of amazing. I am almost suspecting drug inducement! :eek: ;)
Click to expand...

Haha ;) That'll be the ADHD - who needs drugs :D :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

HIMUPNORTH said:
Your camera has an onboard exposure meter - USE IT!
Click to expand...

Yup, lost again, Exposure Meter, dunno what it is or how to use it - more reading!!

HIMUPNORTH said:
When you set to Aperture Priority (to control the depth of field), compose the shot and press lightly on the shutter you will notice in your viewfinder an exposure that the camera is telling you it is going to use. Do not ignore that, instead point at bright and dark bits and see how it thinks the scene looks in terms of it's limited dynamic range.
Click to expand...


Okay....

HIMUPNORTH said:
Tell it YOUR decision and take the shot.
Click to expand...

Dunno how to tell it, sorry man I have studied not one bit of exposures with my camera, silly really!

HIMUPNORTH said:
Take several versions if you have the opportunity and take the time to study your decisions and the resultant images. You will learn and improve. Simple really.
Click to expand...

Sounds easy as pie :D

HIMUPNORTH said:
Oh, and show the results here!
Click to expand...

Will do!!

Gary.
 
EdinburghGary said:
Yup, lost again, Exposure Meter, dunno what it is or how to use it - more reading!!
Click to expand...

Yes! Don't worry men can, and should, read! The figures that appear in the bottom of the viewfinder are not the odds of getting a decent photo! :cuckoo:

:D


EdinburghGary said:
Okay....



Dunno how to tell it, sorry man I have studied not one bit of exposures with my camera, silly really!
Click to expand...
This is Manual mode on your camera. You will input both the aperture and shutter speed all on your own. Hold handkerchief over face in case of nosebleeds ;)


EdinburghGary said:
Sounds easy as pie :D
Click to expand...


It is! :D
 
Thanks guys I have sorted my panorama and eventually got an even light across the whole stitch!!!

I am going to do 3 of these.

1 HDR - cooked for 2 hours at gas mark 10
1 HDR - slow boil for 5 min
1 normal :D

I will upload later this evening or first thing tomorrow.

Gary.
 
EdinburghGary said:
The image size is 13,000 x 6,000 :D What size of print could that be?
Click to expand...
Any size you like.

The key factor is that the bigger you print a picture, the further away you'll want to stand to look at it, and therefore the lower the resolution you can get away with.

On the Cambridge In Colour web site, there's a resolution calculator. For somebody with 20/20 vision, it suggests:
350 ppi when viewing at 25cm
175 ppi when viewing at 50cm
87 ppi when viewing at 1m
18 ppi when viewing at 5m

(ppi = pixels per inch)

So with an image that's 13,000 by 6,000 pixels, you can have:
* 37" x 17" at 350 ppi - will look sharp even when viewed really closely, but it's too big to look at really closely
* 74" x 34" at 175 ppi - will look sharp at arms length, but it's too big to hold at arms length
* 148" x 68" (12 feet by 5½ feet!) at 87 ppi - will look sharp on the wall - but it's the size of a wall

You get the idea ...

Two key considerations though.

Firstly if the original image isn't sharp then none of this applies. That's why pros who want to make big images use really expensive lenses.

Secondly, I'm a bit suspicious about where that pixel count came from. 13,000 x 6,000 is 78 megapixels, and if it's a 6-shot panorama then that's 13 megapixels per image not allowing for any overlaps, or perhaps 20 megapixels per image allowing for overlaps. Your D200 doesn't give you 20 megapixels - have you enlarged it in PhotoShop? If so, they aren't "real" pixels and you won't achieve the sizes I've set out above.

If you can describe how you got to 13,000 x 6,000 I'll be able to help you estimate print sizes more accurately.
 
StewartR said:
Any size you like.

The key factor is that the bigger you print a picture, the further away you'll want to stand to look at it, and therefore the lower the resolution you can get away with.

On the Cambridge In Colour web site, there's a resolution calculator. For somebody with 20/20 vision, it suggests:
350 ppi when viewing at 25cm
175 ppi when viewing at 50cm
87 ppi when viewing at 1m
18 ppi when viewing at 5m

(ppi = pixels per inch)

So with an image that's 13,000 by 6,000 pixels, you can have:
* 37" x 17" at 350 ppi - will look sharp even when viewed really closely, but it's too big to look at really closely
* 74" x 34" at 175 ppi - will look sharp at arms length, but it's too big to hold at arms length
* 148" x 68" (12 feet by 5½ feet!) at 87 ppi - will look sharp on the wall - but it's the size of a wall

You get the idea ...

Two key considerations though.

Firstly if the original image isn't sharp then none of this applies. That's why pros who want to make big images use really expensive lenses.

Secondly, I'm a bit suspicious about where that pixel count came from. 13,000 x 6,000 is 78 megapixels, and if it's a 6-shot panorama then that's 13 megapixels per image not allowing for any overlaps, or perhaps 20 megapixels per image allowing for overlaps. Your D200 doesn't give you 20 megapixels - have you enlarged it in PhotoShop? If so, they aren't "real" pixels and you won't achieve the sizes I've set out above.

If you can describe how you got to 13,000 x 6,000 I'll be able to help you estimate print sizes more accurately.
Click to expand...


That was the size after cropping too. I never increase an image size, and I think it was 5 or 6 shots. Most of my shots are 4,000ish wide once I have taken them?

I will get exact figures up at some point.

Thanks for the super detailed info :D
 
EdinburghGary said:
If I move to manual mode I will need to choose an Aperture, a Shutter Speed, an Exposure Compensation? Not sure if this is how to "take exposures?"
Click to expand...
EdinburghGary said:
Yup, lost again, Exposure Meter, dunno what it is or how to use it - more reading!!
Click to expand...
EdinburghGary said:
Dunno how to tell it, sorry man I have studied not one bit of exposures with my camera, silly really!
Click to expand...
Gary, it sounds like you would really benefit from Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. If there's one book that all photographers should read, this is definitely it. Anyone else who's read it will agree with me.
 
StewartR said:
Any size you like.

The key factor is that the bigger you print a picture, the further away you'll want to stand to look at it, and therefore the lower the resolution you can get away with.

On the Cambridge In Colour web site, there's a resolution calculator. For somebody with 20/20 vision, it suggests:
350 ppi when viewing at 25cm
175 ppi when viewing at 50cm
87 ppi when viewing at 1m
18 ppi when viewing at 5m

(ppi = pixels per inch)

So with an image that's 13,000 by 6,000 pixels, you can have:
* 37" x 17" at 350 ppi - will look sharp even when viewed really closely, but it's too big to look at really closely
* 74" x 34" at 175 ppi - will look sharp at arms length, but it's too big to hold at arms length
* 148" x 68" (12 feet by 5½ feet!) at 87 ppi - will look sharp on the wall - but it's the size of a wall

You get the idea ...

Two key considerations though.

Firstly if the original image isn't sharp then none of this applies. That's why pros who want to make big images use really expensive lenses.

Secondly, I'm a bit suspicious about where that pixel count came from. 13,000 x 6,000 is 78 megapixels, and if it's a 6-shot panorama then that's 13 megapixels per image not allowing for any overlaps, or perhaps 20 megapixels per image allowing for overlaps. Your D200 doesn't give you 20 megapixels - have you enlarged it in PhotoShop? If so, they aren't "real" pixels and you won't achieve the sizes I've set out above.

If you can describe how you got to 13,000 x 6,000 I'll be able to help you estimate print sizes more accurately.
Click to expand...

EdinburghGary sorry to hijack your thread, but I'd like to say thanks to Stewart R for this guide, I've been after something like this for a while now. :thumbs:

Oh and Understanding Exposure is a must, fantastic book. :clap: You can get here for less than a tenner http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/WEB...by=title&Button1.x=19&Button1.y=11&Button1=Go
 
Another vote for Panorama Factory, it’s a great piece of software and very cheap.
One should use manual exposure taking a reading from a mid tone. Where there is a great variance between the brightest and darkest points you will need to chose if you are too lose detail in the highlights or the shadows. Overexpose from the mid point reading if you want to keep shadow detail or underexpose if you want highlights.
 
I use ZoombrowserEX, that came with my Canon camera. Just find the right exposure and shoot everything in manual (I do) then just use zoombrowser and it does it all for you and quickly:

pb1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top