World Wide Panorama mailing list archive

Mailinglist:wwp@yahoogroups.com
Sender:Roger Howard
Date/Time:2005-Jan-21 01:26:00
Subject:Re: HOW TO GET STARTED?

Thread:


wwp@yahoogroups.com: Re: HOW TO GET STARTED? Roger Howard 2005-Jan-21 01:26:00
On Jan 20, 2005, at 5:07 PM, mark1schuster wrote:

>
>
> Despite his wrap across my knuckles, I find Roger Howard's reply to
> my criticism of Panorama Tools very constructive and he shames me
> into downloading it and trying it out, first for single layer 360s,
> then, and this might need a new camera, or at least a wide angle
> attachment, spheres

Ok, I'm glad it didn't come off some other way - I honestly didn't 
intend to be as much a knuckle-wrap as a gentle butt kick in the right 
direction :) We're all struggling to be creative here, but it's also a 
highly technical process - like, in my experience, most creative 
endeavors (I work at a fine arts museum, btw, so I have some insight 
into the insanely technical disciplines behind all those beautiful 
paintings, sculptures, etc).

Anyway, I'm glad you got the nuance, I didn't want to come across as a 
complete a-hole (sometimes I can't help it!).

> Will it work with my old PhotoShop 6?  My OS
> is W-XP.

Absolutely... since you're on Windows, PTGUI or PTAssembler or Hugin 
are your options. These are standalone apps (not Photoshop plugins)... 
they spit out standard TIFF or PSD files which can be read by any 
version of Photoshop.

> Hans Nyberg mentions RealViz 4 although I don't think he was
> actually recommending it.  Hans, I've tried it for single layer
> panoramas but didn't like it.  I thought it lacked sufficient user
> control for difficult stitching.  I don't suppose I would like it
> better for spheres.  Much better for single layers is ArcSoft's
> Panorama Maker 3.  This provides control points for difficult
> stitching.  I've not heard of an ArcSoft spherical application.

I don't think he was recommending it either - and I certainly won't 
(though i own it and use it from time to time). I think it's 
overpriced, buggy, with lower quality output, and while it seems simple 
on first glance, it can easily lead into a lot of frustration. And 
unless you're shooting on a good tripod with calibrated pano head I 
definitely wouldn't recommend it for spherical work (and ESPECIALLY not 
with a lens as long as 38mm). Lack of control is quite true; it has no 
concept of control points either, so even if you "Force Stitch" to 
force it to accept your chosen alignment, it's a purely rough visual 
alignment - never nearly as accurate as control points. Btw, I'm 
definitely not suggesting the PanoTools products are perfect; but on 
the whole, I actually think they are quite suitable for  many people; 
it just takes a little time with someone who knows the tool and who can 
help you develop a workflow for your needs, and then it's pretty damn 
easy.

There was a time when I still did single row cylindrical panos with 
Stitcher... stuff I shot with for instance a 50mm (80mm equivalent),,, 
but even then (or maybe especially then) it could get quite frustrating 
trying to get proper alignment all the way around so I could join the 
ends of the pano together properly, and I would often have image pairs 
that just mysteriously would not stitch to each other, for no reason I 
could imagine, or would end up stitching COMPLETELY wrong. All of this 
is dead simple with a PanoTools stitcher.

Try the autopano/autocreate functionality in PTGUI or PTAssembler... 
with a 38mm lens it should do a good job finding all the control points 
for you. I know when I shoot with rectilinear lenses for cylindrical 
panos, I rarely have to do more than 5 or 10 minutes of tweaking 
control points - they are all set automatically and  very accurately.

Do let us know if you have specific questions; perhaps the reason no 
one responded to the initial emails is simply because it comes up quite 
frequently on the lists. As a community, I think there are different 
groups trying to solve this in different ways - online FAQs and 
tutorials; the new PanoTools wiki; and so on. I think the newly renamed 
IVRPA is going to make a push to reach out more in these areas too, but 
too soon to tell.


Next thread:

Previous thread:

back to search page