leifs wrote:

In Photomatix v4.2 there is no longer a 360 checkbox.

Hope you didn´t use it before!? It´s not for images to stitch - it´s for "closing" the both ends of a single rectangular/equirectangular image to avoid a seam . . .

In the beginning i sometimes made the mistake checking the box when i processed images for stitching . .


Btw.: i suggest to keep using 3 or more brackets . . .

best, Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2012-12-04 00:06:56)

gkaefer wrote:

it is still there. in Fusion and in hdr mode - just scroll down to bottom.
Georg

I was looking for it in batch mode.
Maybe it is not an good idea to use it for a sphere anyhow.

Leif

Thanks

Klaus wrote:  it´s for "closing" the both ends of a single rectangular/equirectangular image to avoid a seam . . .
Since the option also is in the batch-mode it must be more than that.
Maybe it's for neighbouring images in a single-row cylinder, and the closing ends ?

Leif

Last edited by leifs (2012-12-04 12:37:35)

Today was a bad day
I forgot to bring along the SDcard I usually use, with a writing speed of 95MB/s. I've always bring along a couple of other SDcards, and I used on of them.
The scenery cried for HDR ! I used a +1/0/-1 EV setup and started shooting. I heard something was wrong !
The plan B SDcard was not able to swallow the exposures fast enough. Sometime skipping bracket 2 or 3..

So I did a sphere without bracketing. Exposure was decided to avoid burnedout whites and blackout darks. The image below show the scene, and the sky is fine. The ground is too dark. I've tried Photomatix, but it makes artifacts in the sky. I've tried Photoshop "adjustment/levels" but it warps the colors.

Suggestions ?

Leif

Last edited by leifs (2013-01-13 23:52:39)

Agreed!.. done it heaps of times with my D90 images to get an extra two exposures.. ..  It's not perfect but it works well.. I have also done this on windy days to avoid too much blure with moving leaves... .. better to keep it to the dark side side of the exposure, one or two steps down, since tooo much light will kill off features..

Destiny...

klausesser wrote:

1) Use the mirror-lock with bracketing when a card isn´t fast enough . . - as a side-effect you can be sure no mirror-shaking influences your bracketed series.

2) Photomatix can´t help yo verey much here. But carefully processing non-brackted RAWs in CaptureOne or in Lightroom could have helped you out in that case.
Set the curves to linear first!

best, Klaus

1) mirrorless cameras don't have mirrors. no need to lock it up
2) I shoot raw and use DXO to develop the images

I have ordered a couple of speedy SDcards to avoid this problem for the future.
For this case I will have to delve into Photshop.

Leif

leifs wrote:

1) mirrorless cameras don't have mirrors. no need to lock it up
2) I shoot raw and use DXO to develop the images

I don´t even know how an Olympus looks like . . . how would i know it´s mirrorless

best, Klaus

mediavets wrote:

klausesser wrote:

leifs wrote:

1) mirrorless cameras don't have mirrors. no need to lock it up
2) I shoot raw and use DXO to develop the images

I don´t even know how an Olympus looks like . . . how would i know it´s mirrorless

best, Klaus

Here's a review for you:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5

Thank you Andrew - but i´ve no ambition to know all the cameras on the market . .

best, Klaus

mediavets wrote:

It is becoming popular with pano shooters who seek a more compact and lighter weight system.

Ah, ok! (i´m not one of them )

best, Klaus

leifs wrote:

klausesser wrote:

I don´t even know how an Olympus looks like . . . how would i know it´s mirrorless
best, Klaus

I guess it is of no interest, but just to let you know it if you see one
dpreview choosed it to "best camera of 2012"  with Nikon D800 in second place
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/01/01 … 12-results

Leif

Fine. But in the end i definitely prefer a D800 - for many reasons, which are not related to the Oly.

There never was any "best of" choices which really could impress me. Being in the advertising- and marketing-business for
decades i know very well the mechanisms - no matter print or online . . .

best, Klaus

"Don´t trust a test you didn´t fake yourself" as we say . . .

lumelix wrote:

You can also use the "shadow/lights" tool from PS to lighten up the shadows.
It's the same than with psedo HDR, but with a natural look and only for the shadows.
If it's a 360º-Pano, you should do it before stitching with the single images.
Try out a good setting over all and then do it with a batch job.

I have tried this out and it is difficult. I want it to look like I experienced it at the scene.
I stitched it and applied "shadow/lights" tool on the sphere. It looks all right.
http://www.rundskuer.no/panotour/leknes … ltour.html
There is some blownout whites though. And there are some artifacts in the sky, made by the "shadow/lights" tool.
One day I will revisit the pano and try to save the whites and the shadows from DXO and on.

Leif

lumelix wrote:

Hi leif
It looks very nice, this pano! Did you use the pole again ?
If you set all values for the "Lights" to "0", the tool shouldn't touch
the sky.
Perhaps there are some artifacts from the JPG-compression ?

Yes, I used the pole at ca 4m. I used it to get more visible land along the shore and it makes the nadir footprint very small.
The snow at 180 deg to the sun is blownout. It tried to "repair" it using the lights tool, at 10 I think. Guess that's what made patterns in the sky.
I used the "shadow/lights" tool on the stitched pano .
I make TIFFs from DXO so there is no JPG-compression.

Next I will try the "shadow/lights" tool in DXO, before stitch, to see if it can do better.

It still puzzle me that Photomatix makes artifact in the sky. http://www.kolor.com/forum/p110286-2013 … 32#p110286
I've used it in other panos with no problem like this.

Leif