A vertical pano of a New York City Street

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi,

I have decided to spend some quality time with the pictures I took last summer in USA ;-)

Here is a vertical pano of a NYC street I took. It consists of 15 individual images, handheld, single row. Camera 40D, lens 17-40mm, f/8.

Stitching done in PTGUI Pro using equirectangular projection.

I am planning to print this at a poster size, around 40x90 cm. What do you reckon, is it good enough for a poster like that? I mean, is it special enough so that it will hold interest?

A 100% crop for details:

Another 100% crop:

Cheers,

 

[Mark Doodeman]

Wow, very nicely done. I would print it even larger than you are planning to if it were up to me.

The one distracting element in the photo is the fisheye effect, which was probably unavoidable with your setup. Overall, really nice.

 

[Valentin Arfire]

hi Cem,

your beautiful vertical panorama is very interesting and by all means deserves a large print.

regards,

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Cem
a pretty nice view of NYC! I surely would like to see it printed…
The left dark green area is appealing, be carefull when printing that all details come thru!

What is the size of the ending file in pixels? I'm sure you can print it larger, but then you'll need the adequate wall!

Thanks for showing. Enfin!

 

[Asher Kelman]

Wow! I just don't likee to use that word but Cem, my pal, you gave me vertigo. It turns out that the curve is a very powerful disorientating force. One looks down to get bearings and far below one's sees the street. So it's a paradox. Should you destroy this artifact?

Well there are several considerations. First, let me say I do like the picture. It's immediately impressive and colorful. No Nicolas, this is not yet for B&W!

I wonder what of the image is excluded in this crop? I'd really like to see the whole stitch before any crop.

Also how do other projections look?

Whatever you do, at least the buildings in the background should be vertical.

Have you tried stitching this with AutoPano Pro? I don't understand how the curve occurs!

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Mark, Valentine and Nicolas; thanks for your kind comments.

@Valentine: do you agree with the projection method I have chosen for this one? Mark has mentioned that he is doubting the fish eye effect but I personally think that it makes the composition interesting with sleek curvy lines.

@Nicolas: the image is aroung 8000x3500 pixels in size. My EPson 3800 prints only up to 95 cm so that is my limit, but I could have it printed bigger elsewhere. Thanks for the tip re. the green area. There is indeed a lot of tonality detail in the green area as can be seen in this crop:

Cheers,

 

[nicolas claris]

Well 90 cm high will be 225 dpi, largely enough!

You may have oversharpen a bit, this can be seen on the 100% crop for details (1st one) on the cab roof, but also on the brick wall on the last crop. I wonder if a light gaussian blur would correct this… But maybe that's just on screen and your printer will get rid of it…
Though it would be seen on a Lamda print… Have you made any print test of this image already?

Gorgeous details/reflection in the green building!

A tip (if you don't know it already) select that dark green building and make a layer of it, then apply a 15/15/0 to 40/40/0 "unsharp mask" stop until halo appear around…
That's what we do for dark seas, they suddenly come to be crystal clear… ;-)

 

[Valentin Arfire]

how could I agree or not to your work?
I already said I liked it; and a large print will look very nice;
I think you could go down to a resolution of 150 dpi so the final print could be maximum 140 cm at most but at 200 dpi will be 1 meter tall. At photographic 300 dpi it would be only 67 cm.

Of course the buildings are straight and to remove the effect would need to add some vertical lines or even better, start a new project with the original photos and the different lens/projection - but do you really want this? I'm sure you thought well and got to this result not by mere accident.

regards,

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

...I wonder what of the image is excluded in this crop? I'd really like to see the whole stitch before any crop.

Also how do other projections look?


Whatever you do, at least the buildings in the background should be vertical...

Hi Asher,

Firstly, thanks for your reminder for the verticals, I have now corrected in the original using the tall brick building as my reference point for verticals.

Re. the whole composition without crops using different projections, here are three options I've looked at:

Equirectangular:

Rectilinear:

Transverse mercator:

I do not consider the middle one as an option since the image looks very badly stretched towards the ends. I think that there may be some other possibilities to do this better, so I am hoping the experts will chime in ;-).

Cheers,

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Well 90 cm high will be 225 dpi, largely enough!

You may have oversharpen a bit, this can be seen on the 100% crop for details (1st one) on the cab roof, but also on the brick wall on the last crop. I wonder if a light gaussian blur would correct this… But maybe that's just on screen and your printer will get rid of it…
Though it would be seen on a Lamda print… Have you made any print test of this image already?

Gorgeous details/reflection in the green building!

A tip (if you don't know it already) select that dark green building and make a layer of it, then apply a 15/15/0 to 40/40/0 "unsharp mask" stop until halo appear around…
That's what we do for dark seas, they suddenly come to be crystal clear… ;-)

Hi Nicolas,

The sharpening effect you've mentioned is caused by the jpg conversion, on my CS4 screen all looks peachy. But I'll pay attention to sharpening a bit less when I do the definitive version later.

Also thanks for the LCE tip for the dark green areas. The image deserves more PP time from me, I'll pay attention to getting the contrast and details right in all areas before printing.

Thanks again.

Cheers,

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

how could I agree or not to your work?
I already said I liked it; and a large print will look very nice;
I think you could go down to a resolution of 150 dpi so the final print could be maximum 140 cm at most but at 200 dpi will be 1 meter tall. At photographic 300 dpi it would be only 67 cm.

Of course the buildings are straight and to remove the effect would need to add some vertical lines or even better, start a new project with the original photos and the different lens/projection - but do you really want this? I'm sure you thought well and got to this result not by mere accident.

regards,

Hi Valentine,

I'm afraid I won't go back to NY any time soon so a reshoot is not possible. Even then, the only thing I'd do differently would be to shoot a 2nd (or even 3rd) row to keep more details horizontally after cropping.

Thanks for your very kind comments.

Cheers,

 

[nicolas claris]

So now we're all waiting for a snapshot of the print on your wall!

 

[erik leeman]

Hi Cem!

It looks like a very nice image to print, but probably not an easy one to find a good place for : )

I doubt if spherical/equirectangular projection is ideal for it, I'd say cylindrical or transverse Mercator would be more suitable. You should be very careful that the horizon is exactly in the centre of the projection, it appears to be slightly low in your previews. If invisible you can find the horizon easily by tracing the perspective vanishing points of the building's geometries.

In my experience good image material will be more than detailed enough for a viewing distance of less than 20cm when printed at 200 dpi on a top quality printer, you might even consider 'uprezzing' it a bit. Enlarge the original images before stitching for best results though.

Regards,

Erik Leeman

 

[Mike Shimwell]

Cem, great stuff.

I look forward to hearing aout the print.

Mike

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Cem!

It looks like a very nice image to print, but probably not an easy one to find a good place for : )

I doubt if spherical/equirectangular projection is ideal for it, I'd say cylindrical or transverse Mercator would be more suitable. You should be very careful that the horizon is exactly in the centre of the projection, it appears to be slightly low in your previews. If invisible you can find the horizon easily by tracing the perspective vanishing points of the building's geometries.

In my experience good image material will be more than detailed enough for a viewing distance of less than 20cm when printed at 200 dpi on a top quality printer, you might even consider 'uprezzing' it a bit. Enlarge the original images before stitching for best results though.

Regards,

Erik Leeman

Hi Eric,

This is excellent advice, especially re. the uprezzing prior to stitching. Sorry it took me a while to react, I have been very preoccupied in the past few days.

Cheers,

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

AutoPano trial

Hi All,

I have had much welcome help from Lionel Laissus who is one of the founders of Kolor, the makers of AutoPano Pro. Lionel was kind enough to have a go at my source files (15 of them) and came up with this mercator projection as a result. I like it a lot, what do you think?

Cheers,

 

[Bill Miller]

Arizona sky

Cem, 15 shots thats all - LOL

here is your creation with some Arizona clouds added.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Cem,

Just to let folk know. Lionel Laissus us the co-founder of KOLOR, at Challes-les-Eaux, France and creator of AUTOPANO PRO. See my discussion of the superb Panobook 2009 which celebrates the grand stitching work of over 200 pro and amateur photographers from 56 countrides, worldwide.

He was visiting with me yesterday and I showed him your Pano Project and challenged him to have a go. He emailed me those images this morning.

I am so impressed that the ghosting is gone and the resulting pictures are clearer, cleaner and more satisfying. Notice how this view gives one two important experience. In the foreground the road is presented in a personal "in your face" view which makes it appear that move 1 ft forward and you will fall to your death. Then look ahead and the risk of that height is paid off with a great 3D view.

As Biller Miller noted, the paleness of the sky can be dealt with by adding a sky cloned from elsewhere. I like the principal. However, I'd suggest, instead, adding an unadjusted curves layer, set to multiply and about 4% which will increase the density of the buildings. That percentage can be adjusted to give the optimum effect. One can then refine it using a mask in that curves layer.

Bravo Lionel for being so sporting as to personally help with this picture! It's really appreciated. I find this projection very satisfying and the removal of ghosting is, to me at least, nothing short of a miracle!

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Cem, 15 shots thats all - LOL

here is your creation with some Arizona clouds added.

Hi Bill,

This is an excellent idea and your example is very dramatic looking, thanks!
When I decide how the pano should be stitched, I'll then add some clouds as you suggested.
But I think that one should also create some reflections of the clouds in the tall buildings' mirror-like surfaces. It will be a nice PS challenge ;-).


Cheers,

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

...However, I'd suggest, instead, adding an unadjusted curves layer, set to multiply and about 4% which will increase the density of the buildings. That percentage can be adjusted to give the optimum effect. One can then refine it using a mask in that curves layer.

Bravo Lionel for being so sporting as to personally help with this picture! It's really appreciated. I find this projection very satisfying and the removal of ghosting is, to me at least, nothing short of a miracle!

Hi Asher,

Thanks for the layer suggestion, I appreciate it. The source files I have sent to Lionel were bland conversions from raw done in a hurry. When I do the final stitch, I'll convert them more carefully to get better lighting and density on the buildings. After that, there will be some real photoshopping done to deal with local lighting and to add the clouds, among other things.

Lionel, thanks again for taking on this challenge. This goes to show what an experienced user can achieve with Auto Pano. Impressive really.

Cheers,

 

[Asher Kelman]

Anyone else want to comment on the value of the marcator projection. do you use it as a preference and if so what do you like ot for.

Here it does give a dramatic two part image. We look straight ahead and see the world in front of us but if we look down, there's the personal look of where WE might be if we are not careful. The dramatic dropping away in Cem's picture, is too me remarkable and dramatic. Do you agree?

Also what are your uses for this interesting projection?

Asher

 

[Klaus Esser]

Anyone else want to comment on the value of the marcator projection. do you use it as a preference and if so what do you like ot for.

Here it does give a dramatic two part image. We look straight ahead and see the world in front of us but if we look down, there's the personal look of where WE might be if we are not careful. The dramatic dropping away in Cem's picture, is too me remarkable and dramatic. Do you agree?

Also what are your uses for this interesting projection?

Asher

Hi Asher, hi Cem!

Great shot, Cem! My version of AutoPanoPro (1.4.2) doesn´t provode other than spherical, cylindrical and planar projections (the 1.9 Alpha doesn´t run on my G5 Mac) so i found a workaround with extreme planprojections:
here´s a shot which has about 160deg horizontal. Planprojected it´s extremly distorted to the sides.
So i used Photoshop´s "warp" tool and undistorted the outer ranges while leaving unchanged the center.
It´s still a "very wideangle-look" - but not as extreme distorted as before.

I shot around 80x3 (bracketing) pictures using a 85mm on a 20D: (this is not the final image!

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Klauss
this is a very nice picture, I do like the unsual colors for modern architecture, could be a Franck Gerhy design…
Any insight of the building such as Architect, place, use?

Thanks for sharing, IMO this has not much UWA image.
One can see some strange "smoke" in the right part of sky and right right building…

 

[nicolas claris]

Anyone else want to comment on the value of the marcator projection. do you use it as a preference and if so what do you like ot for.

Well, the Mercator projection seems more accurate and more "dramatic". I don't need the clouds, the image is standing by itself IMO.
One can feel looking down the street/image botom that one can get vertigo!
BUT
I also do like the first Cem's attempt. It is not accurate, it has it own deformation, but I feel that the intent is/was not show a perfect image, clean, straight, vertical and arcitecturely correct!
I liked at first sight this impression of the building walls sucking-up my eyes… I felt I shared the same emotion as the photog…
Sometimes imperfection tells more than perfection…

This said, the Mercator projection undoubtly seems amazing, powerfull, interesting and promising…
It brings ANOTHER tool to the photog, and as for any tools one may choose to use it or not for such a picture or another…

For easier comparison, I show both images below:

Original: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mercator

- - - -

 

[Asher Kelman]

Thanks, Nicolas,

Cem's original version has the street being a simple straight band with tiny cars behaving perfectly in the great distance. It's dispassionate, even emotionally sanitized, perhaps but still impressive

The APPro version on the right, however, makes the ground much more pressing and so changes the whole meaning and immediacy of it. The APPro mercator projection, at least in this one picture, brings us to the brink and presents the ground as an equal option to the full dimensionality of what's ahead. I like it for it's engagement of our senses more fully.

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Well, the Mercator projection seems more accurate and more "dramatic". I don't need the clouds, the image is standing by itself IMO.
One can feel looking down the street/image botom that one can get vertigo!
BUT
I also do like the first Cem's attempt. It is not accurate, it has it own deformation, but I feel that the intent is/was not show a perfect image, clean, straight, vertical and arcitecturely correct!
I liked at first sight this impression of the building walls sucking-up my eyes… I felt I shared the same emotion as the photog…
Sometimes imperfection tells more than perfection…

This said, the Mercator projection undoubtly seems amazing, powerfull, interesting and promising…
It brings ANOTHER tool to the photog, and as for any tools one may choose to use it or not for such a picture or another…

Thanks, Nicolas,

Cem's original version has the street being a simple straight band with tiny cars behaving perfectly in the great distance. It's dispassionate, even emotionally sanitized, perhaps but still impressive

The APPro version on the right, however, makes the ground much more pressing and so changes the whole meaning and immediacy of it. The APPro mercator projection, at least in this one picture, brings us to the brink and presents the ground as an equal option to the full dimensionality of what's ahead. I like it for it's engagement of our senses more fully.

Asher

Hi Asher, Nicolas,

Honestly, I liked the mercator version very much until I saw it next to my original version. Then I've realized why I went for the spherical projection to start with. When I look at that version on the screen at full size, the eye is seeing only a horizontal part at a time. As such, the curvature of the buildings almost disappear. Also, looking at the immersive details the first projection is better than Mercator. I really dislike the lower right hand side of the Mercator one since the road is raised to a higher level and the cars are much bigger than they ought to be. It diminishes the vertigo effect IMO. In the end, it is a matter of personal taste and mine is leaning towards the original version, thanks to Nicolas for showing the pictures next to each other and thus making me realize it.

Cheers,

 

[Klaus Esser]

Any insight of the building such as Architect, place, use?

hey Nicolas!

look here: http://www.klausesser.de/FrontMarta.html (click into the picture).
Yes - it´s a building which Frank Gehry designed.

best, Klaus

 

[nicolas claris]

Thanks Klaus

what are the walls made of? Bricks or colored metal?

 

[Klaus Esser]

Thanks Klaus

what are the walls made of? Bricks or colored metal?

Hi Nicolas!

It´s bricks.

best to you, Klaus

 

[nicolas claris]

Thanks Klaus

I revisited and got to all rooms now! very nice and good tool for the Museum!

A little comment though, under the pano you wrote "click and drag mouse for interactive
on arrow go to next room" doesn't work for me on my MacBook Pro, It works only if I double click on the white arrow…

Bonne soirée!