Marks in the sky on my 360 Panorama

Did you use a polarising filter? These can cause banding on wide angle shots of the sky.
 
Obvious question: are they visible in any way in the original files or only in the stitched pano?
 
Gotta be a smudge on the filter or lens surely,as they are all the same across the frame.
 
TCR4x4 said:
Gotta be a smudge on the filter or lens surely,as they are all the same across the frame.
Click to expand...

After a preliminary examination of my UV filter, there was a very similar pattern on it, very finely, odd smudge. Cleaned it up and shot a few test shots, and it seems like it's not there now. It's odd because only this set had the marks, and they only came up against blue surfaces. When I shot against my white wall, nothing, against my black PC, nothing, but against a blue surface, I could see them again. No idea why.
 
Could be something to do with the angle of the sun against the filter?
 
Blue skies do tend to show up dust on sensors very effectively when it's practically invisible elsewhere, especially when compared to a pure black or white surface.

I suspect it's at least partly to do with it being more of a mid tone. Detail in shadows and highlights is always more difficult to discern.
 
I'm afraid it looks like another example of how putting an unnecessary UV filter on the front of a lens can sometimes ruin a very nice shot!
 
My next move would be to try it without the filter.
 
Rod.F said:
Only uv filters can get smudges on them? :thinking:
Click to expand...

But why use a uv filter in the 1st place, it has no use on a dslr and on this occasion appears to have degraded the image. A pointless mistake. Fair enough if it was on a polariser IMO as at least the application of the filter would be for a creative purpose.

Why use a uv filter at all?
 
odd jim said:
But why use a uv filter in the 1st place, it has no use on a dslr and on this occasion appears to have degraded the image. A pointless mistake. Fair enough if it was on a polariser IMO as at least the application of the filter would be for a creative purpose.

Why use a uv filter at all?
Click to expand...

Some people want to use them, some don't. However, here it appears to be the smudge that degraded the image, which just so happened to be on the filter but could easily have been on the lens' front element if there never was a filter.
 
The degradation was caused by my carelessness in not checking my filter was free of smudges and marks, and that's why I use a UV filter, not for the UV filtering so to speak, but for the added protection.

I've done side by side comparison shots numerous times with filter on and off, and each time the results have been almost indistinguishable, even at 100%. I use quality Hoya filters only.

I guess it's a personal thing, I value the peace of mind of running a filter and a hood too much to not use one.

The smudge (since cleaned and back to brand new condition) would of been on my lens rather than my filter if I hadn't had it on. The reason there are marks at all is because I still haven't received my hood, which I always use to avoid any contact with the lens optics themselves.
 
Rod.F said:
Some people want to use them, some don't. However, here it appears to be the smudge that degraded the image, which just so happened to be on the filter but could easily have been on the lens' front element if there never was a filter.
Click to expand...

Marks or smudges on the front element very rarely show themselves on the image, but anything on a filter will show up very clearly, so the chances are if this smudge was on the element it wouldn't be quite so obvious.

I've had little specs of dust show themselves up quite badly when using a polariser...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top