Is there an idiots guide to panoramas?

allPhotoBKK said:
I would recommend using Panorama Studio 2. Thats the best software package to stitch panoramas
Click to expand...

That is an extraordinary claim !
There are more Excellent pan stitching programs than you can shake a leg at.
A majority of them are feature mature and further developments are now only concerned with technical and data processing issues.
by far the most used by professionals and advanced users is PTGui.
However Like PTGui, most of the others are based on the original open source "Pano tools kit" and the mathematics of Helmut Dursch.
Though some like PTGui and PTAssembler have now written their own stitching tools, control point pickers, and blenders, they still remain compatible with the original Pano Tools assets.
My personal choice is PTAssembler which I have been using since it was brought out by Max Lyons as a front end Gui for pano tools. As I get free lifetime updates and am thoroughly familiar with it, I am unlikely to move to a different program any time soon. Though I have tried a majority of the major ones.
 
Hi!

Ive found reading this thread really interesting.

Its something ive always wanted to try but never done yet! I really struggle with landscape photography on two fronts... one is finding the time... and the second is perspective loss. I see a good picture with my eyes but how it turns out in the shot is lost. Its usually features in the background i want to be prominent are lost and look much less significant than my eye sees them. Especially when im going down the wide angle lens and crop route which is all iv tried up to now!

Id never have thought to shoot these in portrait but it makes sense! The tip on manual exposure is so simple but again one id not have thought about.

I have two questions.... that i cant see the answers too soo far...

What focal length is best to shoot at? Im on full format but my second body is crop sensor so interested for both formats. Im thinking 50mm to mimic human eye perspective... but is that just a myth that 50mm mimics the eye?

And two... can apples softwear affinity photo do pano joining... has anyone any experience of doing it? That is what i have but mainly use canon dpp for raw edit and that if i need to touch up but hardly used it! Sitting for a long period editing isnt where i get my enjoyment... its out with the camera

Appreciate any advice!
 
captures.in.time said:
Hi!

Ive found reading this thread really interesting.

Its something ive always wanted to try but never done yet! I really struggle with landscape photography on two fronts... one is finding the time... and the second is perspective loss. I see a good picture with my eyes but how it turns out in the shot is lost. Its usually features in the background i want to be prominent are lost and look much less significant than my eye sees them. Especially when im going down the wide angle lens and crop route which is all iv tried up to now!

Id never have thought to shoot these in portrait but it makes sense! The tip on manual exposure is so simple but again one id not have thought about.

I have two questions.... that i cant see the answers too soo far...

What focal length is best to shoot at? Im on full format but my second body is crop sensor so interested for both formats. Im thinking 50mm to mimic human eye perspective... but is that just a myth that 50mm mimics the eye?

And two... can apples softwear affinity photo do pano joining... has anyone any experience of doing it? That is what i have but mainly use canon dpp for raw edit and that if i need to touch up but hardly used it! Sitting for a long period editing isnt where i get my enjoyment... its out with the camera

Appreciate any advice!
Click to expand...

The focal length makes no difference to the ultimate perspective of the panorama. You choose the lens to capture the amount of detail you want. For a given view a wide angle lens requires fewer shots to cover that view . And a long focus, far more, but enlarges the detail.

I know nothing about Apple software.
However programs based on Pano Tools are the best and most adaptable, and PTGui the most used of those, for both Apple and PC users. And is used by almost all professional panographers.. Tools like those found in photoshop and lightroom are very limited indeed. But give some basic projections.
I use PTAssembler. Written by Max Lyons and originally based on Pano Tools. But is PC only.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
The focal length makes no difference to the ultimate perspective of the panorama. You choose the lens to capture the amount of detail you want. For a given view tw wide angle lens requires fewer shots to cover that view . And a long focus, far more, but enlarges the detail
Click to expand...

This. Not enough people understand this point, but you can easily test it for yourself with a tripod and a couple of primes.

And in the same way, wide angle lenses don't actually have more depth of field.
 
dave.hallett said:
This. Not enough people understand this point, but you can easily test it for yourself with a tripod and a couple of primes.

And in the same way, wide angle lenses don't actually have more depth of field.
Click to expand...

Dave

Thanks for the reply. I completely get how wide angle lenses do not have more depth of field... You create depth of field by your aperture choice... Which i generally would have set at f8 or f11 for general landscape shots unless u really need the extra but then you can loose sharpness as you are out the sweet spot.

I am lost a little by the perspective point you made though. For instance 50mm prime lenses in my understanding on a full frame sensor is how the eye sees things. So if ive a foreground interest shot the interest and lets say the mountain behind look as my eye sees it... But i often find... Or i think i find if i use a wide angle lens... In the picture the foreground is big... Or like i see but the background is lost in a distance that i dont see with my eyes... Does that make sense???
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
The focal length makes no difference to the ultimate perspective of the panorama. You choose the lens to capture the amount of detail you want. For a given view tw wide angle lens requires fewer shots to cover that view . And a long focus, far more, but enlarges the detail.

I know nothing about Apple software.
However programs based on Pano Tools are the best and most adaptable, and PTGui the most used of those, for both Apple and PC users. And is used by almost all professional panographers.. Tools like those found in photoshop and lightroom are very limited indeed. But give som basic projections.
I use PTAssembler. Written by Max Lyons and originally based on Pano Tools. But is PC only.
Click to expand...

Reading ur point again and going back to focal length I guess maybe my point is possibly not related to pano shots... but i need to get out and try them...

But more just to shooting a traditional wide angle landscape single shot?!?! I definitely know one thing... i compose many landscapes of what i think will look good when i see it with my eye... but when i look through the view finder i often just dont press the shutter! For 7 times out of 10 that the background detail is lost in an acre of sky!
 
captures.in.time said:
Dave

Thanks for the reply. I completely get how wide angle lenses do not have more depth of field... You create depth of field by your aperture choice... Which i generally would have set at f8 or f11 for general landscape shots unless u really need the extra but then you can loose sharpness as you are out the sweet spot.

I am lost a little by the perspective point you made though. For instance 50mm prime lenses in my understanding on a full frame sensor is how the eye sees things. So if ive a foreground interest shot the interest and lets say the mountain behind look as my eye sees it... But i often find... Or i think i find if i use a wide angle lens... In the picture the foreground is big... Or like i see but the background is lost in a distance that i dont see with my eyes... Does that make sense???
Click to expand...

Perspective is controlled by viewpoint alone.
How much is included is controlled by focal length and format. (=angle of view)
Normal vision has an equivalent angle of view produced by a 42mm lens on FF.

It is not difficult to train yourself to see as a camera does, artist have to do it to get any sense of reality.
Eastern artists used to ignore relative sizes, and make more important things bigger, perspective was given by putting things that were further away higher in the frame.

When you concentrate on a distant subject you disregard your periferal vision, you do not change the relative size of objects.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
Perspective is controlled by viewpoint alone.
How much is included is controlled by focal length and format. (=angle of view)
Normal vision has an equivalent angle of view produced by a 42mm lens on FF.

It is not difficult to train yourself to see as a camera does, artist have to do it to get any sense of reality.
Eastern artists used to ignore relative sizes, and make more important things bigger, perspective was given by putting things that were further away higher in the frame.

When you concentrate on a distant subject you disregard your periferal vision, you do not change the relative size of objects.
Click to expand...

I think i just need to get out there and give it a go and train my eyes more! Prob thinking about it too much! It is interesting ur point that its 42mm rather than 50mm... ud think 42mm primes would be the norm!

I guess also like u say ur brain and how ur eyes see things is complex and decisions are made about focus etc etc just by what your mind is concentrating on without you being particularly aware... whereas a camera can only view or create a picture as you set it!

There is also the simple fact that often the actual camera position especially when set up on a tripod is usually 1m closer and a bit lower to the scene than my eye position where im standing surveying the scene.
 
captures.in.time said:
I think i just need to get out there and give it a go and train my eyes more! Prob thinking about it too much! It is interesting ur point that its 42mm rather than 50mm... ud think 42mm primes would be the norm!

I guess also like u say ur brain and how ur eyes see things is complex and decisions are made about focus etc etc just by what your mind is concentrating on without you being particularly aware... whereas a camera can only view or create a picture as you set it!

There is also the simple fact that often the actual camera position especially when set up on a tripod is usually 1m closer and a bit lower to the scene than my eye position where im standing surveying the scene.
Click to expand...

Pentax made a superb limited edition 43mm F1.9 lens in the film days.
However the early standard lenses for 35mm, tended to be based on a 2 inch focal length.... so it stuck with us. Though many street photographers prefer 35mm to 50mm... Many standard lenses marked as 50mm are nearer a true 52mm.

These days that range is covered by many short and standard Zooms.

On the question of tripod camera height we tend to go with what is easy to set up, rather than the most suitable point of view.

My usual tripod is longer than many, (manfrotto 055B) so it is easy for me to use a higher viewpoint with out raising the centre column. However I find I take most of my pans hand held with the aid of a walking pole/ monopod, with an extra added extension piece.
 
Last edited:
captures.in.time said:
Dave

Thanks for the reply. I completely get how wide angle lenses do not have more depth of field... You create depth of field by your aperture choice... Which i generally would have set at f8 or f11 for general landscape shots unless u really need the extra but then you can loose sharpness as you are out the sweet spot.

I am lost a little by the perspective point you made though. For instance 50mm prime lenses in my understanding on a full frame sensor is how the eye sees things. So if ive a foreground interest shot the interest and lets say the mountain behind look as my eye sees it... But i often find... Or i think i find if i use a wide angle lens... In the picture the foreground is big... Or like i see but the background is lost in a distance that i dont see with my eyes... Does that make sense???
Click to expand...

It does, but shooting panos is a bit different. You really need to set up a tripod somewhere with a bit of space (because having things very near to the camera can make panos hard to stitch) and try it for yourself. Once you've shot two panos with two different lenses to take in the same points on the landscape and seen that you get the same composition, you'll see what Terry means.

As regards single shots, you're on the right track. People often select focal length by what they want to include, but assuming you can stand where you like, that's a mistake, as you've discovered. The focal length of a lens controls the relationship between the foreground and the background. Decide that first, then stand where you need to in order to get the view you want. Bruce Percy explains it well here: https://www.brucepercy.co.uk/blog/2...controlling-background-to-foreground-presence, but note that this *only* applies to single shots.

There's also a lot of other free advice on his site, if you poke around a bit!
 
dave.hallett said:
It does, but shooting panos is a bit different. You really need to set up a tripod somewhere with a bit of space (because having things very near to the camera can make panos hard to stitch) and try it for yourself. Once you've shot two panos with two different lenses to take in the same points on the landscape and seen that you get the same composition, you'll see what Terry means.

As regards single shots, you're on the right track. People often select focal length by what they want to include, but assuming you can stand where you like, that's a mistake, as you've discovered. The focal length of a lens controls the relationship between the foreground and the background. Decide that first, then stand where you need to in order to get the view you want. Bruce Percy explains it well here: https://www.brucepercy.co.uk/blog/2...controlling-background-to-foreground-presence, but note that this *only* applies to single shots.

There's also a lot of other free advice on his site, if you poke around a bit!
Click to expand...

Thanks! Seems good advice and the penny defo dropping! Ill check that out over the weekend! Just in from a 14 hr shift at work... no wonder iv so little time for photography!
 
dave.hallett said:
The focal length of a lens controls the relationship between the foreground and the background.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. Where you stand controls the relationship between the foreground and the background. You effectively said that yourself previously:
dave.hallett said:
Once you've shot two panos with two different lenses to take in the same points on the landscape and seen that you get the same composition....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
dave.hallett said:
It does, but shooting panos is a bit different. You really need to set up a tripod somewhere with a bit of space (because having things very near to the camera can make panos hard to stitch) and try it for yourself. Once you've shot two panos with two different lenses to take in the same points on the landscape and seen that you get the same composition, you'll see what Terry means.

As regards single shots, you're on the right track. People often select focal length by what they want to include, but assuming you can stand where you like, that's a mistake, as you've discovered. The focal length of a lens controls the relationship between the foreground and the background. Decide that first, then stand where you need to in order to get the view you want. Bruce Percy explains it well here: https://www.brucepercy.co.uk/blog/2...controlling-background-to-foreground-presence, but note that this *only* applies to single shots.

There's also a lot of other free advice on his site, if you poke around a bit!
Click to expand...

What brucepercy should have explained is that perspective is controlled by viewpoint alone, which is where your eye is.( perspective is what he euphamisticaly calls prescence.) It does not change with focal length. Things close to you appear bigger than things further away, what ever lens you use.
Focal length only changes the angle of view.
 
StewartR said:
No it doesn't. Where you stand controls the relationship between the foreground and the background. You effectively said that yourself previously:
Click to expand...

Terrywoodenpic said:
What brucepercy should have explained is that perspective is controlled by viewpoint alone, which is where your eye is.( perspective is what he euphamisticaly calls prescence.) It does not change with focal length. Things close to you appear bigger than things further away, what ever lens you use.
Focal length only changes the angle of view.
Click to expand...

Yes, technically true. But Bruce is not wrong, because if you're shooting a single shot and have chosen your foreground and background elements, where you stand and what focal length you use are not independent choices.

When shooting a pano, all that matters is where you stand, because you will take as many shots as you need, vertically and horizontally, to include the elements you want. With a single shot, that's not so.

So you are right, but I think Bruce's approach is helpful to beginners. Pick your lens according to the relationship you want between foreground and background, then go and stand where you get the composition you wanted.

The alternative relies on people realising that if they want bigger mountains in the background, they need to stand further away from their foreground. Once you realise that the foreground gets bigger and smaller according to where you stand, whereas the mountains remain much the same, that should begin to make sense. But I don't know that it's the easiest place to start.

Shooting panos is quite an educational activity, IMO...
 
dave.hallett said:
I think Bruce's approach is helpful to beginners. Pick your lens according to the relationship you want between foreground and background, then go and stand where you get the composition you wanted.
Click to expand...
Personally I totally disagree, because I think you've got it the wrong way round, and I don't think it's helpful to teach beginners wrong things just because they're easier to understand.

But I'm not a beginner and I'm not teaching any beginners, so I think we're allowed to disagree here.
 
Yes, I agree. If you're the kind of person who can stand at a point, see how the elements come together and know what focal length you will need to capture your vision, that's the ideal. And a good reason to work with one focal length until you know it well. The rest of us need to look through the lens to find out what it does, so we start with our best guess about the lens we think we need, then try to find a place to stand to make the picture we had in mind. Horses for courses...
 
StewartR said:
Personally I totally disagree, because I think you've got it the wrong way round, and I don't think it's helpful to teach beginners wrong things just because they're easier to understand.

But I'm not a beginner and I'm not teaching any beginners, so I think we're allowed to disagree here.
Click to expand...

I too disagree, because, it is a visual question not about photography.
If you stand in the correct place and use artists L masks to view the scene, you will see it as it is, mountains and forground in the correct relationship to that viewpoint.
This will be true with no lens at all. The relative size of background and forground objects is determined by viewpoint. It teaches and requires you to stand in the right place for the image to look as you want it.

You then only need to zoom or choose a lens that gets in the crop that you want.
Or for a pan choose the number of overlapping images to do the same.
If you want a highdetail high pixel count image for great enlargement use a telelens and a large number of shots., if you only want a normal sized output with fewer shots use a wide angle lens.
 
@captures.in.time what Terry and Stewart are saying here is all quite true and if their advice makes sense to you, following it should yield good results. If it doesn't, you can go about things in the way Bruce recommends, and it should get you to the same place by a different route so long as you're not shooting panos, as noted. Anything is better than doing what most people do at first, which is to stand nowhere in particular, reach for the zoom, set it wide to 'get it all in' and then wonder why the mountains look so much less dramatic in their final shot!
 
Last edited:
dave.hallett said:
.Anything is better than doing what most people do at first, which is to stand nowhere in particular, reach for the zoom, set it wide to 'get it all in' and then wonder why the mountains look so much less dramatic in their final shot!
Click to expand...
Hear hear! Been there, done that.
 
I have read this thread with interest or rather with fascination, especially the stuff about all the complicated and not to say expensive kit being recommended, I own a tripod and a monopod and I actually took the tripod out once and used it, well I lugged it around set it up and attempted to use it, it just got in the way of me taking photo's.

I live on Dartmoor and can walk miles with my dogs and the less kit I carry the better, the image below is made up of 11 images taken in portrait orientation and stitched together in Lightroom, all of my stuff is handheld, just me and the camera and my dogs of course.

BHS4- by Tim Riesner, on Flickr

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that you really don't need all that kit, don't get lost in the technology, just do it !!
 
TVRTim said:
I have read this thread with interest or rather with fascination, especially the stuff about all the complicated and not to say expensive kit being recommended, I own a tripod and a monopod and I actually took the tripod out once and used it, well I lugged it around set it up and attempted to use it, it just got in the way of me taking photo's.

I live on Dartmoor and can walk miles with my dogs and the less kit I carry the better, the image below is made up of 11 images taken in portrait orientation and stitched together in Lightroom, all of my stuff is handheld, just me and the camera and my dogs of course.

BHS4- by Tim Riesner, on Flickr

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that you really don't need all that kit, don't get lost in the technology, just do it !!
Click to expand...
Nice shot. It's definitely possible to manage without, especially if the subject is fairly distant, as here. The closer things are, the more important it becomes to rotate around the correct point, so YMMV.

My top tip when doing handheld panos is that I find using my camera's built-in level very helpful when panning across. If I frame vertically (for resolution) but keep each shot level, I'm more likely to pan across correctly. With my old camera, I would often veer downwards as I went across, losing a lot of picture. Even so, it's best to allow a little extra when doing it handheld, as you will have plenty of resolution if you need to crop in a bit at the end, and a bit of insurance is very worthwhile.
 
TVRTim said:
I have read this thread with interest or rather with fascination, especially the stuff about all the complicated and not to say expensive kit being recommended, I own a tripod and a monopod and I actually took the tripod out once and used it, well I lugged it around set it up and attempted to use it, it just got in the way of me taking photo's.

I live on Dartmoor and can walk miles with my dogs and the less kit I carry the better, the image below is made up of 11 images taken in portrait orientation and stitched together in Lightroom, all of my stuff is handheld, just me and the camera and my dogs of course.

BHS4- by Tim Riesner, on Flickr

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that you really don't need all that kit, don't get lost in the technology, just do it !!
Click to expand...

No one has suggested buying specialist kit in this thread. Though perhaps a number of us have a full set up, for when it is needed.
It seems hand held pans are the norm these days, except indoors and when shooting 360x180 VR pans. When a tripod and pan bracket and fish eye lens are almost certainly necessary.

I find it necessary to use a walking pole/monopod for most of my photography, to control my age related tremor. However they are also a help for anyone in keeping the shots vertical and level. And they are not extra geer to carry as I always have one with me.
 
Last edited:
From experience even a good 24mm lens is suitable for panos. Any less and there is easily trouble with the merging.

It is far easier to merge anything without a fairly close foreground and doesn't require any special head to be honest. In daytime it even works handheld if you are careful, but it is too easy to mess up the horizon line and have too much foreground on one end and too little on the other... Tripod is more methodical.
Anything with a close foreground requires special attention and special tools.

Lightroom and Photoshop do a very good job. So does Hugin.

Enjoy :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top