Nope!..  but its really dependent on where the stop is place on the other end, where I have my quick release clamp fitted. Every user would have it set differently.  There is no absolut position for this.. I am not sure why I put my stop there, it might have been put there when I bought it, not sure... I will take a photo of it to show you.. I moved the B position from 35mm to 50mm back.. a huge amount  out.. Its really nice to finally understand the NNP process to find the entry point. I have been moving my head left to right all day looking at two objects at home, one close and the other in the background.. I can see the corner of the wall move left to right.. That would mean the NNP is out.. But If I move my head so the corner of the wall maintains the same distance from the edge of the shelf, then its right.. I did not have it in my mind as to how it worked, but now I do..

mediavets wrote:

Destiny wrote:

I have now set my NNP, I think perfectly but I can always play with it a bit more..

Was the 'B' value anywhere close to 63mm?

If only I had a MacPro with heaps of RAM.. I had to reduce the images size to about 20% of the actual image size and even then reduce it even more  for viewing here.. The pano using 35mm would be huge with hue zooming abilities.. The 35mm is very sharp.. Its a great lens.. I would hate to think what the files size would be if I captured bracketed shots.. I can still do it but I will be at it for days and even then I would most defiantly have to reduce the image size to about 10%..



Destiny..

For the time being, when experimenting with shooting with 35mm lens,  why not shoot at a lower res. rather than having to downsize images afterwards?

So how do I do that. I have it set for RAW.. I do not know if I can set it for DX which is what I am assuming you mean.... I can with my Fisheye.. Some cameras you can set the size of the image but I am not sure I can do that with the D800... I tried to find the settings..

Its so nice to finally have success.. I have tried very hard to achieve it.. Just a pity I do not have a better Mac but I cannot put any more RAM in my iMac.. It was the biggest iMac at the time.. Now they are twice as powerful at half of the price...

Destiny..

Hi Destiny
You can set the image size down to "M" (medium, 5520x3680 pix), so it's "only" 20 MPix.
When setting it to "S" (small, 3680x2456pix) you get exactly 50% or 9 MPix and tack sharp images.
Use the "QUAL"-button on the left side of the D800 and turn the front dial til you see the "M" or "S"
in the upper LCD screen in the left bottom corner
You can also use the settings for "image quality" in the camera settings.
But this "L", "M" or "S" works only with JPG, not with RAW.

Now you have to work with 68 images, so with RAW files from the Nikon D800,
it's a little bit to much for an old iMac
With JPG, I only would use the "Fine" or "Normal" compression.
With "Basic" there are some artifacts visible.

klausesser wrote:

lumelix wrote:

Now you have to work with 68 images,

How come? I have 48 pictures @25% overlap when i use my 35mm on fullframe on the Panoneed.
So it can´t be more images using the D800 instead of a 5D2 i guess . . . 35mm is 35mm and FX is FX . .

I guess the Seitz VRdrive2 uses a different algorithmn to calculate its shooting pattern.

Hi Destiny
As mediavets and Klaus said, 48 images should be enough when shooting a full sphere with a 35mm lens on a full frame Nikon.
So I suspect that you have still the "DX"-format set from the use of your 10,5mm fisheye.
If so, it's better, you change that to FX when shoot with der 35 mm.

Destiny wrote:

Things can always be improved on, well most things can...

Well - right: most things can . . but not all.

Klaus

Destiny wrote:

If I didn't use RAW I would prefer to use 16bit TIFs.. But I do not have the option to capture in this format...

You can´t capture 16bit/TIFs with a D800. You can generate them via processing HDR and SAVING the mapped images as 16bit/TIFs.
That makes sense. Processing RAWs straight to 16bit/TIFs doesn´t make sense.

Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2013-01-15 22:12:34)

Destiny wrote:

Well, thats a new one on me... I never knew you could create a 16bit TIF from jpg's.. using bracketed shots.. How are the graphic elements re-packaged since jpg's are lossless files.... ??

Destiny...

JPG definitely isn´t lossless at all.

Processing several bracketed JPGs and processing them in a HDR app generates very much more dynamic than one JPG alone ever could do.
So processing a set of, let´s say, 5 JPGs to ONE TIF makes sense to save it as 16bit/ch when it´s tone-mapped from a 32bit/ch HDR-format.

Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2013-01-15 23:49:54)

Destiny wrote:

Klaus, by definition a jpg is a lossless graphic format.. The amount of lossey is determined by the user...

JPG isn´t a "graphic" format. JPG is a pixel-format. JPG definitely is lossy and doesn´t support 16bit.

Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2013-01-16 00:37:56)

Destiny wrote:

I am confused.. Here you say "JPG definitely isn´t lossless at all." and  "JPG isn´t a "graphic" format. JPG is a pixel-format. JPG definitely is lossy and doesn´t support 16bit." ...

You are contradicting yourself..

and that was my point about jpg.. you cannot get a 16bit out of jpg.. But a D800 can capture 8bit TIFs and with using Photomatix, since I am not using a lossey format, I can get a 16 bit TIF from the fused images..

Destiny

PS.. a JPG is a graphic format made up of pixels.. All bitmaps are.. There are only two kinds of graphics, vector and bitmaps.. A tiff is a pixel graphic as well. It depends on the type of bitmap that determines the colour, from RGB which is made of of 3 channels equating to 16.7 million colours to a TiF which can hold Trillions and 5 channels of colour.. Each pixel can only old one colour..

klausesser wrote:

Destiny wrote:

Well, thats a new one on me... I never knew you could create a 16bit TIF from jpg's.. using bracketed shots.. How are the graphic elements re-packaged since jpg's are lossless files.... ??

Destiny...

JPG definitely isn´t lossless at all.

Processing several bracketed JPGs and processing them in a HDR app generates very much more dynamic than one JPG alone ever could do.
So processing a set of, let´s say, 5 JPGs to ONE TIF makes sense to save it as 16bit/ch when it´s tone-mapped from a 32bit/ch HDR-format.

Klaus

"Graphic formats" are vector formats. Photographic formats are pixel-based. (that´s simplified - you´ll find tons of info on the web additionally)
So JPG isn´t a "graphic format" but a photographic format. Of course you also can save graphics as jpg - but you loose all vector-quality.

JPG is 8bit/ch. It´s compressions result in a reduced tone- and color-range and each compression produces artefacts.

You didn´t read carefully - i said: to achieve 16bit with using JPG you need to HDR a set of, let´s say 5 or 7,  bracketed JPG shots. In these 5-7 shots you sample a dynamic-range which by far exceed a usual shot - no matter whether TIF or RAW or whatever.

Processing these brackets to HDR makes the result a 32bit/Channel floating point data-file. This one contains that much of information that it´s not displayable adaequately on usual hardware.
For displaying it on usual hardware or for using it in photography you need to use "tone-mapping" resp. "tone-compressing". That´s a technology to reduce 32bit/ch fp-files to 8 or 16bit integer files which can be used for photographic use.

Having processed a 32bit/ch HDR with tonemapping you can save the results as 16bit TIFs.

I´m definitely not contradicting myself.

But i have not the remotest problem when you look for deeper explanations elsewhere. Some time ago I suggested to you to gather information about photography before starting to deal with the things you deal with actually, sorry to say that.

I have a feeling i was right . . . but that´s not  reason to get angry - as you did the last time i said that - it´s a reason to deepen your knowledge.
Here are some people who are willing to help - me included, as you see.

But i ask you again to dig more seriously into the basics of photography.

best, Klaus

Destiny wrote:

I guess you are the expert...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG

I wouldn´t call me an expert - i´m just a photographer for quite a long time now knowing what i do well enough

best, Klaus

Hi Destiny
What Klaus couldn't know as an Canon shooter is, that you can save the images from the D800 in RAW with 14bit color depth.
If you are shooting in RAW 14bit mode, it makes sense to convert this images to TIFF 16bit to prevent color loss while converting.
Specially when working with Photomatix, I do this always with 16bit TIFFs as input files. Eg. with View NX or Capture NX2.
But for handling RAWs from the D800, a fast and powerfull computer is really a good invest.

I just removed all Align images setting.. They seem to be going through ok now..

Destiny...

Hi....  It appears its not apg that doesn't like me, but rather it hates my RAM, well I hate that too.. Its not enough to render the images as they were so I had to reduce them to 20%.. I have already captured the image at TIF small.. I thought it might have been ok but apparently not.. and I cannot put more RAM into this Mac...

The issue now is.. after reducing the image size, even though I have Excellent RMS, I had to straighten the pano but it not all straight.. You can see the poll is straight but the wall is not.. If I make the wall straight then the poll and other things are wobbly or crooked.

I am sure I am almost there.. I just have to understand apg better... So, how do I fix the straightening of the pano..

Destiny..