What are the correct settings for apg using a fisheye lens?  

Share your tips and tricks here or get help with any Autopano Pro / Giga problem!
No bug reports (of any kind) in this forum!
no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:45 am

Strangely enough, these optimised jpg images seem to stitch a lot better than the full size tif images... I just put them on High 200 and the results are much better... The pano image is not great for a test.... I got a RMS of 4.55.... Perhaps its a tif/jpg thing... I would have thought that tifs would be better... Perhaps I need to play more with the render options....

D...

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:15 pm

I thought I might as well run those jpg's through PTGui... well.. strangely enough it asked for the lens and focus information etc.. which it does not do for the tif files.. I just put 15.00mm.. and 0 for crop... it said you cannot have that but it still processed the jpg's anyway... and to my surprise.. the quality of the stitching was just about perfect.... I would truly love to say... apg.. oh wow, its amazing.. but I can't ... if my images are really yuck, even PTGui wouldn't stitch them....

D..

no avatar
mediavets
Moderator
 
Posts: 16415
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 130 posts
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Info

by mediavets » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:25 pm

Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home so you can play with these optimised images.... There are only 11 of them but they provide a perfect result in PTGui so there is not reason why apg won't do the same... famous last words....

D....

I'm not very experineced with extended dynamic range pano imaging but my understanding is that one should apply a consistent set of adjustments to all bracketed sets when processing.

It doesn't seem as if you have done that because there are huge differences in exposure between these images.

In what sense do you consider these images 'optimised'?

Anyway here's my 'quick-n-dirty' stitch. It's not perfect but it's not too bad.

I removed two of the images in the upper row, and did some CP editing to remove links between non-adjacent images and to try and find some better CPs between images in the upper row. Not easy with so much plain wall and ceiling. Then adjusted levels a bit and sharpened a little..


Last edited by mediavets on Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andrew Stephens
Many different Nodal Ninja and Agnos pano heads. Merlin/Panogear mount with Papywizard on Nokia Internet tablets.
Nikon D5100 and D40, Sigma 8mm f3.5 FE, Nikon 10.5mm FE, 35mm, 50mm, 18-55mm, 70-210mm. Promote control.

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:38 pm

Destiny wrote:To be honest Andrew..... I don't see it making a difference....

Indoors - that means close distances to objects - the AF might produce hefty focal differences depending on your aperture=dof. That´s not really much using a fisheye - but it might cause inconsistent focusing nevertheless.

Some of the major rules shooting panos and bracketing: NEVER use an AF - use the hyperfocal distance=appropriate dof. NEVER use the AWB - use fixed colortemperature. NEVER use the aperture for setting the exposure when you´re in a series - this results in iconsistent focusing. Shooting bracketed ALWAYS juse time and NEVER use the aperture for EV-steps.

Changing the focus-distance - which the AF might do on close objects without you notice it - means to change the aspect-ratio of the objects. Using a fisheye this means only minor changes in the aspect-ratio because of the very wide angle. But if you accidently use the lens wide open it will realize it - and the stitcher might run into problems. A stitcher needs constant values to work best.

Again: this focus-thing is absolutely vital with non-fisheye lenses. But even fisheyes might produce inconsistent DOF/FOV when you let the AF change the focus when you shoot indoors. The AF can´t know what´s the best focus for a group (!) of images - it only knows what´s the best point in every single image. If you have very close objects in image 1 and distant objects in image 2 it will produce two very differently focused images - which the stitcher might have problems to combine.

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:43 pm

Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home . . .

Don´t worry - compared to how my home looks sometimes your home meets laboratory standards . . . ;):cool:

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:54 pm

Destiny wrote:I thought I might as well run those jpg's through PTGui... well.. strangely enough it asked for the lens and focus information etc.. which it does not do for the tif files.. I just put 15.00mm.. and 0 for crop... it said you cannot have that but it still processed the jpg's anyway... and to my surprise.. the quality of the stitching was just about perfect.... I would truly love to say... apg.. oh wow, its amazing.. but I can't ... if my images are really yuck, even PTGui wouldn't stitch them....

I suggest not to "optimize" anything before stitching - unless you´re shooting RAW, then convert them first without doing anything else - for finding out what´s the issue.

Try a setting of -10° for the horizontal row and shoot a Zenà­th - that means 7 shots. This way the Nadir-hole is small enough for being retouched. After having rendered the equirectangular image make cube-faces from it by using the KRPano-droplet "convert sphere to cubes".
Retouch the Nadir hole on the down cubeface and save it. Then you drag the 6 cubefaces together onto "convert cube to sphere" droplet. It makes it an equirectangular again - but with the Nadir-hole closed.

After all put the equi into PTP.

best, Klaus

P.S.: what´s your time-zone? Canberra?
Last edited by klausesser on Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:00 pm

Destiny wrote:Hi.. can you tell me if this is correct... Its the Auto settings when I put in my images.....

D...

I´m a bit confused: you use a 10,5mm and the settings say 9,84mm - in my eyes that´s a bit too big difference, isn´t it?

best, Klaus
Last edited by klausesser on Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:07 pm

Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home so you can play with these optimised images.... There are only 11 of them but they provide a perfect result in PTGui so there is not reason why apg won't do the same... famous last words....

D....

One of the advantages of shooting fewer fisheye images: most likely you have some more features in neighboured images the stitcher can work with. But having big featureles surfaces - like walls or celings - it helps to stick some markers on them to provide features the stitcher can recognize. It´s easy to remove them later in the equi or in the cubefaces by retouching.

best, Klaus
Last edited by klausesser on Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
mediavets
Moderator
 
Posts: 16415
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 130 posts
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Info

by mediavets » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:19 pm

klausesser wrote:I suggest not to "optimize" anything before stitching - unless you´re shooting RAW, then convert them first without doing anything else - for finding out what´s the issue.

These 'optimised' images are bracketed exposures processed with Photomatix. they don't look 'right' to me - what do you think?

Try a setting of -10° for the horizontal row and shoot a Zenà­th - that means 7 shots.

She can't do that because the new Nodal Ninja 4 has positive stops at 15 degree implements on the pitch axis and it seems you cannot set any other intermediate pitch values. Seems like a crazy design decision to me, but this sems to have been been confirmed by Nick Fan on the Nodal Ninja forum.

That's why Destiny is shooting - at my suggestion - a lower row at -15 pitch and an upper row at +60 pitch.

As I understand it her main question/issue is why is she finding so much esaier to get acceptable results with pre-processed bracketed image sets using PTGui rather than APG. I ihink that's a good question.
Last edited by mediavets on Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andrew Stephens
Many different Nodal Ninja and Agnos pano heads. Merlin/Panogear mount with Papywizard on Nokia Internet tablets.
Nikon D5100 and D40, Sigma 8mm f3.5 FE, Nikon 10.5mm FE, 35mm, 50mm, 18-55mm, 70-210mm. Promote control.

no avatar
hankkarl
Member
 
Posts: 1284
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA
Info

by hankkarl » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:45 pm

Destiny, what aperture do you shoot at?

According to the hypoerfocal distance calculator, with a D300 and 10.5 mm lens, at f/11, you should set the focus distance to 1.64 feet, so everything from 0.82 feet to infinity is in focus. At f/16, the setting should be 1.17 feet so everything from 0.58 feet to infinity is in focus.

However, Since you really don't have anything closer than 3 feet, you may want to set the focus to 4 or 5 feet so near objects are even sharper.

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Fri Jul 08, 2011 2:25 pm

mediavets wrote:.
As I understand it her main question/issue is why is she finding so much esaier to get acceptable results with pre-processed bracketed image sets using PTGui rather than APG. I ihink that's a good question.

Hi Andrew!

Funny thing with the limitations on NN - very much photographers using 10,5mm Nikon on crop-cameras use a -10°/-12° setupt for the horizontal row and shoot only one Zenith. On many occasions you can´t shoot a Nadir additionally.

There´s no difference at all in using pre-processed images in PTGui or APG. The difference is that PTGui sometimes can stitch strongly geometrical images better than APG without much more editing then use "optimize".
Even with lenses which show non-linear distortions (UWA for example sometimes show it) PTGui´s optimizer can do a very good job. APG can do it also - but very much more complicated and poorly documented.

I guess Ddestiny better should use complete manual settings not only when shooting but in APG also - instead of counting on ANY automated features.

My experience is that Photomatix in no way does any harm to images which leads to bad stitches. As i told before: i used Photomatix and a 10,5mm Nikon on my 1,6crop Canon 20D for about two years - and also some other manual Nikon lenses. With different versions of AutoPano since 2006.

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:26 pm

Thats the point I was trying to make to Andrew... This is the Auto setting ino from unfused normal images put into apg.. I simply asked if this was correct since when using Photomatix images I need a guild in which to put the same data setting into the info for lens, camera etc... I used this information... but I think its wrong... but Andrew says my gear is definitely recognised so I used that same info... This is why I asked.. It looks wrong!!

D...

klausesser wrote:
Destiny wrote:Hi.. can you tell me if this is correct... Its the Auto settings when I put in my images.....

D...

I´m a bit confused: you use a 10,5mm and the settings say 9,84mm - in my eyes that´s a bit too big difference, isn´t it?

best, Klaus
Last edited by Destiny on Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:37 pm

I batched processed the images Andrew using Auto fusing in Photomatix... I don't understand why they are different.... I am only using LDR images... They should all be the same..... I selected all of the images in one go and batch processed all the images....

I Optimised the images to reduced the file size from tifs to jpg in Photoshop... I saved for the web at 80%.. That is optimised images...

So to get to this results you did a lot of editing... But the same Optimised jpgs and the original 64 bit tifs all did a great job without any editing at all in PTGui.... The same settings on my camera, with the camera in exactly the same spot using unfused images -15 X 6 and + 6- X 6 stitched great in apg.. apg will not however do a very good job of stitching images from Photomatix.. and it will not do a good job of fusing and stitching the images in its own software either...

D


mediavets wrote:
Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home so you can play with these optimised images.... There are only 11 of them but they provide a perfect result in PTGui so there is not reason why apg won't do the same... famous last words....

D....

I'm not very experineced with extended dynamic range pano imaging but my understanding is that one should apply a consistent set of adjustments to all bracketed sets when processing.

It doesn't seem as if you have done that because there are huge differences in exposure between these images.

In what sense do you consider these images 'optimised'?

Anyway here's my 'quick-n-dirty' stitch. It's not perfect but it's not too bad.

I removed two of the images in the upper row, and did some CP editing to remove links between non-adjacent images and to try and find some better CPs between images in the upper row. Not easy with so much plain wall and ceiling. Then adjusted levels a bit and sharpened a little..

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:38 pm

I will look into all this Klaus.... I will try everything you suggested...

D...

klausesser wrote:
Destiny wrote:To be honest Andrew..... I don't see it making a difference....

Indoors - that means close distances to objects - the AF might produce hefty focal differences depending on your aperture=dof. That´s not really much using a fisheye - but it might cause inconsistent focusing nevertheless.

Some of the major rules shooting panos and bracketing: NEVER use an AF - use the hyperfocal distance=appropriate dof. NEVER use the AWB - use fixed colortemperature. NEVER use the aperture for setting the exposure when you´re in a series - this results in iconsistent focusing. Shooting bracketed ALWAYS juse time and NEVER use the aperture for EV-steps.

Changing the focus-distance - which the AF might do on close objects without you notice it - means to change the aspect-ratio of the objects. Using a fisheye this means only minor changes in the aspect-ratio because of the very wide angle. But if you accidently use the lens wide open it will realize it - and the stitcher might run into problems. A stitcher needs constant values to work best.

Again: this focus-thing is absolutely vital with non-fisheye lenses. But even fisheyes might produce inconsistent DOF/FOV when you let the AF change the focus when you shoot indoors. The AF can´t know what´s the best focus for a group (!) of images - it only knows what´s the best point in every single image. If you have very close objects in image 1 and distant objects in image 2 it will produce two very differently focused images - which the stitcher might have problems to combine.

best, Klaus

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:40 pm

Oh thank you... you made me laugh.. I needed that... :lol::P Trying to do panos with baby at my feet and trying to keep the home tidy is really hard... I have and panos with baby in many different areas of the room, with things moved round the room.. its quite funny... I am sure I only have one baby... but she gets around.. sooooo quickly...

D....;)

klausesser wrote:
Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home . . .

Don´t worry - compared to how my home looks sometimes your home meets laboratory standards . . . ;):cool:

best, Klaus

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:55 pm

Hi Hankkar...

I had my camera set to f8 with +_2 on my bracketed shots... I set my first image to 1/5, the light is not great... So looking at the tif files I have a 1/6 - 1/15 - 1/4...

I just set my bracketed images to wide open... due to the brightness outside and the darkness inside....

The fused images from Photomatix on this occasion set to auto are not that great... I was beinging to rush to get a result.... trying to get baby fed...

You know.. to be honest.. it seems that there is a lot of mucking around to facilitate the needs of apg and its many shot comings... I had to change my shooting pattern where as PTGui accepted and processed a good result from my old shooting pattern, but I am not sorry that Andrew corrected my shooting pattern, I think it was a very good call..., since its now stitching a lot better from normal images in apg but the quality of stitch has also improved with PTGui too. Gone from being very good go friggen outstanding...!! WIthout all the bother... Even with my crapy looking fused images I fed into it as optimised jpgs... PTGui still produced a very nice job of stitching..

D...

hankkarl wrote:Destiny, what aperture do you shoot at?

According to the hypoerfocal distance calculator, with a D300 and 10.5 mm lens, at f/11, you should set the focus distance to 1.64 feet, so everything from 0.82 feet to infinity is in focus. At f/16, the setting should be 1.17 feet so everything from 0.58 feet to infinity is in focus.

However, Since you really don't have anything closer than 3 feet, you may want to set the focus to 4 or 5 feet so near objects are even sharper.
Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:04 am

I will definitely look into the manual focusing and see if this makes a difference.. I do not believe anyone has tried harder to use a piece of software.. when I don't really have to bother.. PTGui does a wonderful job.. but.. I don't like using it.. I like agp.. but at what price to my confidence in creating a nice pano..

D...

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:35 am

You know Klaus.. I was thinking of putting markers on my pano area a long time ago... I have lots of round stickers from using at school... but I thought that might be a silly thing to do.. so perhaps not so silly....

Klaus, above you mentioned the droplet thing to create your cube faces.. well.. good idea I started doing that... but you can do this better using ptp... just export them as cubic faces from there... also... what I do with my Nadir patch is shoot the image from using my Nadir Adaptor, which is just great... Now, apg will not accept a single image which is very disappointing.. but PTGui does.. So.. I am sure you have this software.. Try this....

Load your single fisheye Nadir image into PTGui, it will ask if this is a sequence but obviously say no... Now check it out in Preview... you will see that the image is now flat ready for using with the cube face Nadir.. Now render that image as a 64 tif... It also works great for fused images from Photomatix...

Now to patch it... I have used two ways.. some like to use Photoshop.. you can resize edit, rotate and match the patch up very well as I am sure you know.. but you can now do two things... Either use the Auto-Blend Layers under Edit and then merge the visible layers which I am guessing most are already doing.. Then you might have to do a bit of cloning to finalise the image.

But... Try this after you have matched the nadir patch with the Nadir hole in Photoshop.... Do not merge, or Auto-blend layers... but rather... save-as these as 64 tif files both images separately.. Call the main cube face image No1 and the patch as No2.. Now load these images into PTGui.. and process.... you will see your patch is fixed outstandingly.. without any extra editing... once you have this process down pat, its very quick.... and very :cool:

D....



klausesser wrote:
Destiny wrote:What the hell.. you have all seen my messy home so you can play with these optimised images.... There are only 11 of them but they provide a perfect result in PTGui so there is not reason why apg won't do the same... famous last words....

D....

One of the advantages of shooting fewer fisheye images: most likely you have some more features in neighboured images the stitcher can work with. But having big featureles surfaces - like walls or celings - it helps to stick some markers on them to provide features the stitcher can recognize. It´s easy to remove them later in the equi or in the cubefaces by retouching.

best, Klaus
Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:56 am

Ok.. I have just put those 11 optimised images I sent above into PTGui... As tif files I have to do nothing but as optimised jpg's I sent above I have to put in the lens I used, thats all.. and I don't have to keep doing it ether.. with apg, if I want to change/edit anything in the detect, I also have to re-imput all the lens/camera etc back in.. EVERY TIME!.... Very painful...!!..

Even though this pano has been created using crapy images, I am still very happy with it.. I am sorry.. but I find it very hard to knock PTGui in this area.. Its just a bloody good piece of software... and to be honest.. I am looking forward to the day that apg matches or betters it.. but at the moment.. it falls far too short... I for one.. can probably fix most of this in apg using the editing tool and also in Photoshop.. but why the hell do I have to... This pano image below is AS IS from PTGui... I just have to get rid of my blob from the lens and that stupid moth on the ceiling....

Destiny....

PS.. The apg is the first one....... I thought I might put the tif bracketed images into apg as stacks.. Now, don't forget, these images are to the same setting as a single non-bracketed image where i got a good result from.. Taken at -15 X 6 and only the 5 @ 60 up since one of the sets was out of focus as you know.. So same images basically here, stacked in apg rather than the Photomatix images I just processed though PTGui as the first image here... It was quite slow in creating this pano but I also put it to high to try to get better results... Since I have already stacked these images I don't see why I have to go into edit to tick the fused pano setting.. I also had to change the lighting a bit or it was too dark.. apart from that. this is as it came from apg... Same with the PTGui.. this is how it came.. NO EDITING AT ALL..... I could play with the fusion setting to brighten this pano up, but.. how do I recall this info for making my nadir image the same.... This pana result from apg is fixable, at least its not too bad.. but the quality of the image I feel is not as good as the other...




Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:01 am

hi.. I decided to give the inbuilt fusion tools in apg a good try out to make sure about it... I really do not like the fact that there are no digital indicators to record this.. just a visual thing.. The more I tried to get a look I thought could pass the more it went yuck... I was slowing,,, very slowly.. getting rid of some bad links.. when I came across this image below, which has gone this way due to the fusion editing I was doing in apg.... I then gave up....There is no way I will get a good result with fused parts of images that look like this.. even after rendering.. I think the fusion tool changes the images to something I really do not like or want.... So I have no choice.. I have to use Photomatix etc.... But if I use apg to stitch Photomatix output, it finds it hard to stitch them.... even at my new shooting pattern... Oh hum.. at least I now know....

Destiny...


Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:47 am

Ok.. enough testing of apg.... better move on before kolor team get upset with me....and take me off their birthday list... ;) Now to rip ptp appart.. ah.. only kidding.. I love ptp accept for....;)

So me baby and hubby got bored with testing so we went for a walk through the Japanese gardens.... So I thought since you have put up with my yucky untidy home for soooo long, you can see me in the gardens with baby.... and to say thank you to all of you for all your help and advice... especially Andrew for showing me the error of my shooting pattern.. For me.. its a good outcome... not what I really wanted but still a very good outcome..

I think my post has been answered.. with soo many lessons learnt...

Destiny...


Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
mediavets
Moderator
 
Posts: 16415
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 130 posts
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Info

by mediavets » Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:08 am

Destiny wrote:So me baby and hubby got bored with testing so we went for a walk through the Japanese gardens....

Destiny...

I wonder what your little daughter planned to do with that rock she's clutching?
Andrew Stephens
Many different Nodal Ninja and Agnos pano heads. Merlin/Panogear mount with Papywizard on Nokia Internet tablets.
Nikon D5100 and D40, Sigma 8mm f3.5 FE, Nikon 10.5mm FE, 35mm, 50mm, 18-55mm, 70-210mm. Promote control.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Topic author
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sat Jul 09, 2011 11:56 am

Well Andrew. that ROCK, that BLODY ROCK came out of the Japanese garden.. John, my husband is NOT HAPPY.. She slammed it against our car...!! That's what the little horror had planed for it... But John's plan involved throwing it as far away from her as he could.. Our little girl walked around the entire garden clutching that stupid rock!!.. and would not part with it, no matter what... Bloody rock!!! :mad::mad::mad:

D...
Last edited by Destiny on Sat Jul 09, 2011 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:12 pm

Destiny wrote:Well Andrew. that ROCK, that BLODY ROCK came out of the Japanese garden.. John, my husband is NOT HAPPY.. She slammed it against our car...!! That's what the little horror had planed for it... But John's plan involved throwing it as far away from her as he could.. Our little girl walked around the entire garden clutching that stupid rock!!.. and would not part with it, no matter what... Bloody rock!!! :mad::mad::mad:

D...

Be glad she knows what she wants! :cool:

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

User avatar
marianne
Member
 
Posts: 92
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:07 am
Info

by marianne » Sun Jul 10, 2011 6:35 am

Hi D baby,

Always use manual focus.
Go here http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html and print out a focal chart for your camera and lens. Then you can get the maximum sharpness for your images by setting the right focal distance depending on the aperture. I use this table all the time because i am inexperienced.

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron