Frédéric

Thanks for your reply. The head moves 7 degrees with this setup. When it moves from one capture to the next, it needs about 1 second for the first 4 degrees, then it slows down and finishes the last 3 degrees in about 5 seconds.

If I get you right, this is a normal behaviour and could not be changed. It would mean, that moving <6 degrees would last longer than moving 7 degrees, right?

Helmut

Is it the same for a longer move, like 20°? 5s for the last 3° seems very long...

And, yes, moving 3° can be longer than 8°. I plan to make an external closed loop positionning (see http://trac.gbiloba.org/papywizard/ticket/25), using start/stop commands (which always go to full speed), and controling the position from Papywizard. But it will only be possible with a new design, using threads to control the position.

So it seems that you are at the limit. I didn't make precise tests to see what are the critical values...

When I start the external closed loop positioning regulation, I will make a script to measure accelerate and decelerate times, for values from 2° to 10°, to see how to optimize it.

I'm pretty sure Frédéric will speed it up for us one day

I already checked out the Clauss system and maybe I will buy one, when I am a famous panorama photographer

london-will wrote:

I can see this as a major drawback.

An ideal shoot would be 3 rows of 15 shots.   This is really rough workings but my assumption is that moving from one shot to the next @ 100mm would take about 5 seconds, moving between shots @ 200mm takes around 20 seconds.

3 rows of 15 @ 200mm takes 15 minutes
3 rows of 15 @ 100mm takes 3 min 45 sec

(I know this is rough workings but it's a reasonable guide).

3 min 45 seconds is a long time when trying to capture a landscape but 15 minutes is too long to be useful (most of the time).  Basically there is an increase in shoot time of 11 min 15 seconds because the head is working slower with the 200mm lens.  Any advice on reducing this time would be invaluable! 

Cheers

Will

Will,

Welcome to the forum.

Off the top of my head, what if you were to shot column by column rather than row by row?

Or, and this is a bit more work.

If you consistently shot 3 rows of 15 shots with the same lens for your desired pano FOV then you could make a custom presets for the 200mm whereby you shoot every other position in one direction the reverse to take the alternates, for each row.
http://trac.gbiloba.org/papywizard/wiki … Presetmode

..............

BTW for those who have not yet seen Will's really splendid panos:
http://www.willpearson.co.uk/

Last edited by mediavets (2009-03-18 17:01:38)

london-will wrote:

Do you mean putting the camera in landscape position rather then portrait?  I hadn't thought of that....!  Nice one, I'll give it a try.

No, that's not what I meant but it's a good idea. Worth a try.

I meant to chnage the order in which the matrix is shot so that it shoost column by column rather than row by row (with the camera in portait orientation) my (off the top of my head) thinking was that the pitch variation between rows might be greater than the 'magic' 6 degrees.

Another idea I had -

A short term solution could be to move the head forwards and then back by more the 7'.   example - to advance by 5' move forwards by 13' and back 8'.  I'm not sure if this would be much quicker but I thought I'd put the idea forwards.

My idea about using a custom preset, seeks to achieve the same goal:

"Or, and this is a bit more work.

If you consistently shot 3 rows of 15 shots with the same lens for your desired pano FOV then you could make a custom presets for the 200mm whereby you shoot every other position in one direction the reverse to take the alternates, for each row.
http://trac.gbiloba.org/papywizard/wiki … Presetmode"

This is seeking to achieve the same goal - ie. to make the yaw variation between shots greater than 6 degrees.

A custom prest is simply a list - in XML format - of shooting positions, they can be in any order. This would conventionally be used for defining shooting positions when shooting sphericals with a FE lens, but can be used for any other purpose.

Last edited by mediavets (2009-03-18 17:50:09)

SpeedyPan wrote:

I like this idea and want to give it a try.

Does anyone know how to get a new preset into the Nokia 770?

If your Nokia has a removable card then plug your Nokia in to a PC via USB- the removable card appears as another disk drive to the PC.

Copy the custom preset file to the removable card.

When in Papywizard load the Preset file via File/Load preset...

Preset files loaded this way remain available until Papwizard is closed. Such preset files can have a filename in the form <anyname>.xml.

Installing custom presets permanently is a bit more difficult and they must all be in one XML file with a special name which must be placed in a specific location in the filesystem - on a 770 you would need to install GPE-Filemanager to get access to the filesystem.

Try the other way first - it's easy.

In fact I like to use my presets this way - keeping a 'library' of presets on one of the two removable cards on my N800 (yes, N800 supports two removable cards) and loading them on a per session basis as required.

Last edited by mediavets (2009-03-18 17:49:20)

I'm finding this really tricky.... In a practical world, shooting in a linear way (a, b, c, d, e,) is better to capture a scene, if the scene changes retouching easier.

examples would include -

- Shooting sky where clouds move.
- Shooting landscapes where clouds cast shadows or the sun comes in and out.
- Shooting at ground level where cars / busses etc move in and out of shots.
- Shooting in the blue hour / sunsets when the light changes constantly.

From experience shooting  a,b,c,d, can handle these situations better then shooting one picture every n (white squares of a checkboard).  I know that shooting every n would result in a faster shoot time but I'm not sure it would result in a better render.  I suppose its a payoff between shoot time and getting the best results.

I did a simple test with 10 images from 0 degree to 45 degrees.

Test No. 1 with 0, 5, 10, 15, 20. 25, 30, 35, 40, 45 degrees needed 103 seconds.
Test No. 2 with 0, 25, 5, 30, 10, 35, 15, 40, 20, 45 degrees needed 65 seconds, which means it is about 37 percent faster. In other words... a shot normaly lasting 20 minutes could be done in 12.5 minutes.

I'm not sure, if this "speed-up-trick" really would end up in a worse stitch because the total time needed is so much less.

Both tests were done with 0.5 seconds shooting time and 0.3 seconds stabilization time.

So for me Will has found a really good workaround to speed up panos with long lenses. Thanks for that, Will!

Last edited by SpeedyPan (2009-03-18 21:45:16)

Did one more test with 17 shots over 80 degrees.

Normal order: 180 seconds
Optimized order: 98 seconds

So it is 45 percent faster...

Here are the preset data:

<shoot>
<pict yaw="0." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="5." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="10." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="15." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="20." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="25." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="30." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="35." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="40." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="45." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="50." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="55." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="60." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="65." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="70." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="75." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="80." pitch="0." />       
</shoot>


<shoot>
<pict yaw="0." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="20." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="5." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="25." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="10." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="30." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="15." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="35." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="45." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="55." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="40." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="50." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="60." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="75." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="65." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="80." pitch="0." />
<pict yaw="70." pitch="0." />             
</shoot>

Thanks for all these tests!

SpeedyPan, could you try this scheme:

<shoot>
    <pict yaw="0." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="10." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="20." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="30." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="40." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="50." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="60." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="70." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="80." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="75." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="65." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="55." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="45." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="35." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="25." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="15." pitch="0." />
    <pict yaw="5." pitch="0." />       
</shoot>

Is it faster?