anyone else is interested about it? 
some of my pictures are available at: http://www.kyamk.fi/~ohj8laka/pics2/panoramas/
some of my pictures are available at: http://www.kyamk.fi/~ohj8laka/pics2/panoramas/
something different: panorama photographing.
- Thread starter Nappe1
- Start date
nice pics, what are you using to stich your pics together?
later,
later,
Heh. the first few times I read the title, I saw "paranormal".
Even wierder after reading Nappe1's first post.
Even wierder after reading Nappe1's first post.
Absolutely - I've done quite a few 'montage' type framed images using about 6~10 prints each ...but then I bought a 24mm lens for my SLR which generally captured most of the landscapes in one go. It'd be nice to use it for the montages, but the problem with the really wide angle lens is that ordinary pics then become very hard to align.Nappe1 said:anyone else is interested about it?
Now that we've finally got a digital camera, I've got lots of source images but nothing suitable to join them seemlessly together. I've even been contemplating writing my own software.
Nice. I see that the software you've got doesn't quite mask the discontinuities between the images but it's pretty good. I should take a look at it. Is it limited to a single line of photos or can you place them arbitrarily?
Simon F said:Absolutely - I've done quite a few 'montage' type framed images using about 6~10 prints each ...but then I bought a 24mm lens for my SLR which generally captured most of the landscapes in one go. It'd be nice to use it for the montages, but the problem with the really wide angle lens is that ordinary pics then become very hard to align.Nappe1 said:anyone else is interested about it?
wel, try to Panorama Factory for that... it has lens refraction correction routines which seems to work pretty well.
Simon F said:
well, it is pretty usual that when you don't find program that would 100% suits for you needs you start planning own.
in my case it usually goes so far that idea gets way too big, so that I'd have time to design it as flow chart, without mentioning coding it down. Simon F said:
I haven't done anything else than "strips" and I found Panorama Factory just about a month ago, so I haven't registered it yet. (yeap, it's shareware.
) But I am going to register it... definately. quality is enough for me and there's quite lot tweaking in diffrent phases. (lens correction, stiching, quality improving, image placing, etc.) Still, it does pretty good job even with default settings / in wizard mode to get quickly picture.and oh... trial version of Panorama factory can be find from http://www.panoramafactory.com
Now that is interesting.Nappe1 said:
Flowcharts? They were used by the dinosaurs.... I would never touch them except that patent offices still require them :?Simon F said:
well, it is pretty usual that when you don't find program that would 100% suits for you needs you start planning own.
One other reason for writing some custom software was that I borrowed a friend's negative scanner and I was thinking that if you took multiple scans (or slightly 'jittered' images with a digital camera) you could use those extra images information to create a higher resolution scan.
Cheers. I've loaded it in another window already. Pity there's no linux versionSimon F said:
I haven't done anything else than "strips" and I found Panorama Factory just about a month ago, so I haven't registered it yet. (yeap, it's shareware.
and oh... trial version of Panorama factory can be find from http://www.panoramafactory.com
I've recently found, and am about to try, an internet digital printing service via Jessops in the UK. The example prints in the shops look really good. I was thinking that if I could stick a few images together, I could try out their 15"x10" (37cm*25cm) option to create a couple of panaromas on the one print.... but I'll need a lot of pixels
Captain Chickenpants
Regular
The Pixology printing service that Jessops offer is pretty good. I can bring in some samples if you like.
A little off topic but this is quite an interesting affect
http://www.well.com/user/jimg/stereo/stereo_list.html
CC
A little off topic but this is quite an interesting affect
http://www.well.com/user/jimg/stereo/stereo_list.html
CC
Simon F:
A stitcher is on my todo-list too. But I wouldn't output one panorama-image. My dataset would still be the original images, but with a description on how to merge them (relative position, distortion and low res weight maps for the overlapping areas). Then merge it in real time with a 3D-card. It's possible to have different resolution on different areas, so you can zoom in on the interesting objects. Use wide lenses to get a full 4*pi sr base image, and telephoto for the interesting details.
And about merging jittered images:
I've seen a paper on that in IEEE TPAMI, I'll see if I can find it when I get home. I believe it worked rather well.
A stitcher is on my todo-list too. But I wouldn't output one panorama-image. My dataset would still be the original images, but with a description on how to merge them (relative position, distortion and low res weight maps for the overlapping areas). Then merge it in real time with a 3D-card. It's possible to have different resolution on different areas, so you can zoom in on the interesting objects. Use wide lenses to get a full 4*pi sr base image, and telephoto for the interesting details.
And about merging jittered images:
I've seen a paper on that in IEEE TPAMI, I'll see if I can find it when I get home. I believe it worked rather well.
I downloaded some software awhile back, that consisted of 2~3 command-line programs. The first one was supposed to do something like that, while the last one did the actual merge. Unfortunately I couldn't get it to workBasic said:
You needn't stop there - you could also do multiple exposures to get a big dynamic range and, errr, display it dynamically. While on the subject, have you seen the Siggraph paper where they hacked a video camera so that every second frame alternated the aperture? They then post-processed the data so that it could show a bigger dynamic range in every shot.
Also of note was the "Billboard Clouds" paper - it had nothing to do with the fluffy things in the sky, but with "modelling" objects using sets of images. Quite clever and worth a read. What you described sounded almost related.
Interesting. I'd be keen to see that if you have an electronic copy.
I would probably be lazy in my programming and do a 3D view for manual rough stitching as a start. Which brings me to a question. My Canon IXUS writes some properties in the jpeg images, and one of them is focal length. That could be a usefull value when stitching (*), but I don't know how to get it. Is there a standard way to store meta-data in jpeg? And in that case, is there a standard focal-length tag?
I haven't heard of that video camera trick, but it sounds cool.
"Billboard Clouds", sounds ~like voxels, but where each voxel has a small texture (from an image). Or is it like "the other kind of QTVR"? Where an object is represented by lots of images from different directions.
And I found the paper on my HD. It was a few years since I read it, and I haven't looked much at it now, so you'll have to judge by yourself if it's worth anything.
In the mail, to the address given at your site. (860KB)
(*) It would of course be better with FOV instead (why oh why didn't they store that instead), but focal length will do after some calibration.
I haven't heard of that video camera trick, but it sounds cool.
"Billboard Clouds", sounds ~like voxels, but where each voxel has a small texture (from an image). Or is it like "the other kind of QTVR"? Where an object is represented by lots of images from different directions.
And I found the paper on my HD. It was a few years since I read it, and I haven't looked much at it now, so you'll have to judge by yourself if it's worth anything.
In the mail, to the address given at your site. (860KB)
(*) It would of course be better with FOV instead (why oh why didn't they store that instead), but focal length will do after some calibration.
Thanks to Tim Rowley's web site the first paper can be found here and the Billboard clouds here.Basic said:
I've only had a quick glance but it could be useful. There are a bunch of people who connect el-cheapo web cams to their telescopes, take a video, and then recombine the frames to produce a single good quality image. I wonder if they are using this technique.
Basic said:
I am not quite sure about this, but If I recal right, it's called EXIF extension. it is usually used by digital cameras to save all kind of information about camera's settings when picture is taken. (also if I understood right documentation of Panorama Factory 3.1, it now reads all needed data for stiching from EXIF if available. I am not sure about this, because I am using version 2.4 now. When I'll register, I will update to latest one, and can check this out.)
afaik, EXIF can be found from JPEG and TIFF images. RAW of course usually saves this information too, but each camera manufacturer has own RAW format, so making software for that will be pretty much pain...
EDIT: ah... it's EXIF data.
not JFIF, which is the original name for jpeg format. ... something more:
here you Basic,
http://www.exif.org/
has all specs you need to read EXIF Information.
here you Basic,
http://www.exif.org/
has all specs you need to read EXIF Information.
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
Nice shots
I take it you guys are all using Canon cameras with its stitch assit function? Anyone had luck stiching with other cameras / unassited?
I take it you guys are all using Canon cameras with its stitch assit function? Anyone had luck stiching with other cameras / unassited?
JF_Aidan_Pryde said:Nice shots
I take it you guys are all using Canon cameras with its stitch assit function? Anyone had luck stiching with other cameras / unassited?
I'll make this clear...
tools for my images are:- Olympus C990-Zoom (2.1 Mio digital with 3 x optical Zoom.)
- Panorama Factory 2.4
- Adobe Photoshop 6.0 (color correction, level correction, rescaling.)
... so no Canon here.
and my experience is that usually software that came with camera doesn't really make good panoramas. (depending from manufacturer of course.) so usually you get better results with 3rd party software. (again depending software.)
Nappe1 said:Panorama Factory seems very good on that. I have tried couple of other softwares too, but it seems that I don't need to look for anymore...
Hi Nappe1,
Just gave Panorama Factory a whirl and I can't say that I'm 100% impressed. Although it sometimes automatically aligns the images quite well, when it goes wrong it really goes crazy.
Some of these mistakes I could correct manually but others... well it seems to make certain assumptions about the distortions you get in the images and if you've done something different to those expectations then you are stuck.
I'd have been happier if it could have allowed me to mark a few "nearly matching" points per image and then let it solve for the transformations needed to align them.
Oh well... I'll keep searching I guess (or try using the GIMP)
Captain Chickenpants
Regular
I have used an Olympus C2020 Zoom, it came with a special memory card that overlayed guides to help you line up shots for panoramas, which could then be used by the software that came with it. However this only worked on the olympus branded memory card which was a measly 8MB. I have also used Pixtra Panastitcher with some good results.
BTW excellent article on color correcting digital photos
http://www.gurusnetwork.com/tutorials/photoshop/curves1.html
CC
BTW excellent article on color correcting digital photos
http://www.gurusnetwork.com/tutorials/photoshop/curves1.html
CC
