Panorama true and faked!

When I was young I was tought the foloowing about panorama:

OBJECT

---------^-----------^-----------^-------------^-------------^---------- (camera)

each up arrow is a new photo (in the US "shoot") smile

This photos together made up a TRUE panorama!

What I see here (if I not missed something) is a FALSE panorama
let's see if I can show You how to make a false panorama:

~ The staples are the object!
....................... ................................ ...................o.....................

This was not easy "space" is neglected by the editor here" so take away the dots

the "o" is the camera that is twisted in every direction to get the whole
objekt!

I react because most of the panoramas seen here is FALSE panoramas!
NOTsaid that it's a bad thing.

I just want to know - is TRUE panoramas todays "FALSE" panoramas!
I just want to hear what Your opinion is about this.

Air photos are often "TRUE" panoramas taken by an airplane taking "shoots" every x100 meter puting them toghether (understand?)

If standing in the Empire State building you twist the camera to make a "FALSE" panorama - standing at the same piont.

What is the definision for You for a panorama.

If I can I do true panoramas - for true picturing and false panoramas for effects!

We call "False" panoramas as an "effect panorama" here where I live!
No question about the true panorama for me - it's a panorama - nothing else!

Is this of no iterest - for me it's a huge differense!

Not now telling everyone to do "TRUE" panoramas!

Using the word "panorama" for everything - that is "wide" is that accepted today?

This is only for those who understand my "signs" - for others let me be crazy!

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how it was taken

Sarah

Sarah,

for me it really matters! That's two different ways of making panoramas.
"true" and "effect" panoramas. You must admit there is a difference -
although it doesn't matter for you.

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

1ofUs! said:

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of
the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how
it was taken

Sarah

Click to expand...

Bo,

I understand what your are saying but I also agree with Sarah. A panorama is a panorama.

Why don't you post some examples for all of us?

Bo Wrangborg said:

for me it really matters! That's two different ways of making
panoramas.
"true" and "effect" panoramas. You must admit there is a difference -
although it doesn't matter for you.

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

1ofUs! said:

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of
the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how
it was taken

Sarah

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

OK - that's the answer - I was looking for - It's not of an interest:
"a panorama is a panorama"

Having one of those "True Panoramas" hanging in the town liberary.
They bought it toghether with the orginal on a "KODAK GOLD CDR"
5.5 meters about 0.95 meters hight. I'm proud of it! I bears my sign/smile/

However I worked five days with it - and as i didn't have that big Epson inkjet with Archival color it was expensive for me - BUT cheap for them!

I used level instruments and huge tripoids etc to do that - I don't think
I'll do many more of those!

Not a big deal I think - just wanted to twist your minds/smile/

or....is a panorama just a panorama .... not for me!

Bo Wrangborg

blay1 said:

I understand what your are saying but I also agree with Sarah. A
panorama is a panorama.

Why don't you post some examples for all of us?

Bo Wrangborg said:

for me it really matters! That's two different ways of making
panoramas.
"true" and "effect" panoramas. You must admit there is a difference -
although it doesn't matter for you.

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

1ofUs! said:

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of
the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how
it was taken

Sarah

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Bo Wrangborg said:

When I was young I was tought the foloowing about panorama:

OBJECT

---------^-----------^-----------^-------------^-------------^---------- (camera)

each up arrow is a new photo (in the US "shoot") smile

This photos together made up a TRUE panorama!

Click to expand...

This only works if you are about ten inches away from a big object. If you tried this on the ground with a distant view, you'd end up with 6 almost identical pictures, due to parallax. If you tried to truly capture the view in one direction from the top of the Empire State Building using this concept, you'd take about two hundred shots and then fall off the edge.

Neil

Neil,

I love that answer! LOL and a smile!

I see your point - and I truly think You understood my "dots"!
You are right - it's about distance! The army uses it for "3D-panoramas"
here in Sweden - that's where I was learnt it!

Thanks -

Smile again!

Bo W

Neil Jones said:

Bo Wrangborg said:

When I was young I was tought the foloowing about panorama:

OBJECT

---------^-----------^-----------^-------------^-------------^---------- (camera)

each up arrow is a new photo (in the US "shoot") smile

This photos together made up a TRUE panorama!

Click to expand...

This only works if you are about ten inches away from a big object.
If you tried this on the ground with a distant view, you'd end up
with 6 almost identical pictures, due to parallax. If you tried to
truly capture the view in one direction from the top of the Empire
State Building using this concept, you'd take about two hundred
shots and then fall off the edge.

Neil

Click to expand...

To me a panorama is any photo outside the standard aspect ratio we have come to think of as "normal" that shows you more of a scene than any one "standard" photo could ever show you. So by my definition, I have no trouble with a photo taken in the aerial style or panning from a single location.

Bob,

Is a photography ( Flat, 2D) a real representation of the world you see (the result depends on the focal length of your lens etc...) ?

Then, are there "true" and "false" panoramas to represent a scenery ?

What we are doing is an artistic representation of the reality.

It is not a geographical map as you would like to do from a plane or from a moving train.

I am not a geograph and I like it....

Eric.

Bo Wrangborg said:

Having one of those "True Panoramas" hanging in the town liberary.
They bought it toghether with the orginal on a "KODAK GOLD CDR"
5.5 meters about 0.95 meters hight. I'm proud of it! I bears my
sign/smile/
However I worked five days with it - and as i didn't have that big
Epson inkjet with Archival color it was expensive for me - BUT
cheap for them!

I used level instruments and huge tripoids etc to do that - I don't
think
I'll do many more of those!

Not a big deal I think - just wanted to twist your minds/smile/

or....is a panorama just a panorama .... not for me!

Bo Wrangborg

blay1 said:

I understand what your are saying but I also agree with Sarah. A
panorama is a panorama.

Why don't you post some examples for all of us?

Bo Wrangborg said:

for me it really matters! That's two different ways of making
panoramas.
"true" and "effect" panoramas. You must admit there is a difference -
although it doesn't matter for you.

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

1ofUs! said:

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of
the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how
it was taken

Sarah

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

How about a definition that is simply process based; that for this challenge a panorama is a photograph created by stitching together several (say 3 or more?) overlapping photos. Even the wide angle definition has some caveats since very wide angle lenses can provide even greater than 90 degree coverage. I think the emotional impact of a larger view is rather obvious.
Mike K

Hi,

Don't bother the words "TRUTH" or "FALSE" - they are dangerous words when talking about this. It's gives one an impression that "true" is "true" AND "false is "BAD" - THAT is NOT the meaning here!

Two ways of making panoramas - Let's redifine the words so that they don't interfere the discussion

You may call it "FLAT" or "TWISTED" panoramas giving two totaly different
results.

• I'm sorry for using those words - it's giving one the wrong meaning or angle/smile/ -( did you get that last one???? smile )

Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

Eric_hk said:

Is a photography ( Flat, 2D) a real representation of the world you
see (the result depends on the focal length of your lens etc...) ?

Then, are there "true" and "false" panoramas to represent a scenery ?

What we are doing is an artistic representation of the reality.

It is not a geographical map as you would like to do from a plane
or from a moving train.

I am not a geograph and I like it....

Eric.

Bo Wrangborg said:

Having one of those "True Panoramas" hanging in the town liberary.
They bought it toghether with the orginal on a "KODAK GOLD CDR"
5.5 meters about 0.95 meters hight. I'm proud of it! I bears my
sign/smile/
However I worked five days with it - and as i didn't have that big
Epson inkjet with Archival color it was expensive for me - BUT
cheap for them!

I used level instruments and huge tripoids etc to do that - I don't
think
I'll do many more of those!

Not a big deal I think - just wanted to twist your minds/smile/

or....is a panorama just a panorama .... not for me!

Bo Wrangborg

blay1 said:

I understand what your are saying but I also agree with Sarah. A
panorama is a panorama.

Why don't you post some examples for all of us?

Bo Wrangborg said:

for me it really matters! That's two different ways of making
panoramas.
"true" and "effect" panoramas. You must admit there is a difference -
although it doesn't matter for you.

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Sweden

1ofUs! said:

A panorama is any photo that offers a wide and expansive view of
the scene, whatever it may be. It doesn't really matter to me how
it was taken

Sarah

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Panorama - Any image which displays more than 180° in one or more directions.

Now obviously 180° is a bit large for what most people consider panoramas so any image which goes beyond normal lens FOV and aspect ratio is considered a panorama.

"Real" & "Fake"

Both the types of panoramas that Bo discribes are infact "real" panoramas. They both show more than you can capture with a normal lens with a normal aspect ratio. The proper terms for his "real" and "fake" are linear panorama and radial panorama.

-Linear panoramas show an image without any perspective distortion and appear quite 2D. Any flatbed scanner is actually displaying a linear panorama of whatever you scanned.

----The problems with linear is that you have to move the camera the same distance as your target. If you are shooting a 4ft park bench then you move 4ft. If you are shooting a 1000ft building then you have to move 1000 feet.

----You also have to deal with horrifically bad parallax because your camera is moving. The ideal way is to use a slitscan (like a flatbed scanner) so that you only sample a very narrow but long view.

----Imagine trying to do a sunset with a FOV of 90° and the horizon encompasses about 60 miles?

-Radial panoramas show an image which is distorted because it is a spherical/cylindrical image being projected onto a flat plane. If you were to print out a 360° image so that it was 10ft long you could join the two ends into a ring, stick your head in the middle and you would see a distortion free 360° view.

----If you use the proper equipment you have no issues with parallax and you don't need to move your camera about other than changing the angle that it points.

A real "fake" panorama can be found in cheap P&S cameras. All they do is cover the top and bottom of the image so you are actually loosing information, not gaining it. The lens still takes the same horizontal FOV but now you get less vertical.

Yes ... that's true..

When doing this huge panorama related to above - I did work real hard.

I used Hasselblad PLANAR lens - good but still giving distorsion so the "overlapping" was huge. I also used the Hasselblad instrukctions for doing this. The upper and lower parts was "cut of" (the photo was a panorama) The Planarlens was the only lens I could manage to do it!

The job was done in Photoshop overlaping and "twistng" distorsion.

(I did the same at the same time with my pentax - but that I think was not a planar construction - impossible for me to use in PSP.)

I also did that photo as a radial photo - with two tripoids one the center the other as a support for an "arm" that get the center of the camera outside the center of the main tripoid - this arm and lengs was given by hasselblad.

The rest was scanning photoshopjob etc.

The result was totaly different - both good but the liniar havyworked one was outstanding. I don't no why - as I can agree with you - it should be the same result - maybe i "screwed it up" in photoshop - however there must be another parameter that I don't understand - the liniar one was outstanding compared to the special cirkular one as a true picture of the objekt in question - so I must think further - why is the difference that big!

It also feel logical as used by militari and photgrametri for making maps!

There are also other aspects - with distance with circular "shooting" you get more "mist" at longer distance - You also get less sharpness with distance -since you enlarge those parts far away at the sides.

The object - an whole street in Skane Sweden

I must also say - not to confuse - the street had houses on only one side -

so it was not a "close up" picture. It was an opurtunity to make a photo that never again would be possible to take - the block opposite to the objekt was taken away for building a new cityblock.

However making it easy - don't do liniar panoramas as it's a havy work - also having "leveling" instruments to get the same hight all the time to compensate for the distorsion - or make the distorsion the same at all pics.

Also to make it easy in PSP - having the same (here) long exact distance betwen every shootingplace.

I did that as an experimant - and it showed two totaly different results!

Yes they are totaly different - but both good in it's "artistic" way! Not the same at all!

The liniar was great for documentation as well as "my artistic goal".
I did it smile

Regards
Bo W
Sorry for my english - time now soon morning - 03.36
must go to sleep for some hours!

Asmordean said:

Panorama - Any image which displays more than 180° in one or more
directions.

Now obviously 180° is a bit large for what most people consider
panoramas so any image which goes beyond normal lens FOV and aspect
ratio is considered a panorama.

"Real" & "Fake"
Both the types of panoramas that Bo discribes are infact "real"
panoramas. They both show more than you can capture with a normal
lens with a normal aspect ratio. The proper terms for his "real"
and "fake" are linear panorama and radial panorama.

-Linear panoramas show an image without any perspective distortion
and appear quite 2D. Any flatbed scanner is actually displaying a
linear panorama of whatever you scanned.
----The problems with linear is that you have to move the camera
the same distance as your target. If you are shooting a 4ft park
bench then you move 4ft. If you are shooting a 1000ft building
then you have to move 1000 feet.
----You also have to deal with horrifically bad parallax because
your camera is moving. The ideal way is to use a slitscan (like a
flatbed scanner) so that you only sample a very narrow but long
view.
----Imagine trying to do a sunset with a FOV of 90° and the horizon
encompasses about 60 miles?

-Radial panoramas show an image which is distorted because it is a
spherical/cylindrical image being projected onto a flat plane. If
you were to print out a 360° image so that it was 10ft long you
could join the two ends into a ring, stick your head in the middle
and you would see a distortion free 360° view.
----If you use the proper equipment you have no issues with
parallax and you don't need to move your camera about other than
changing the angle that it points.

A real "fake" panorama can be found in cheap P&S cameras. All they
do is cover the top and bottom of the image so you are actually
loosing information, not gaining it. The lens still takes the same
horizontal FOV but now you get less vertical.

Click to expand...

I would love to see a scaled for the web version of the picture you took.

Shay said:

To me a panorama is any photo outside the standard aspect ratio we
have come to think of as "normal" that shows you more of a scene
than any one "standard" photo could ever show you. So by my
definition, I have no trouble with a photo taken in the aerial
style or panning from a single location.

Click to expand...

Shay,

And if you want to take a 360 degree panorama, unless you stay at one point and pivot around 360 degrees you'd have to travel in an infinitely long straight line until you got back to where you started from due to the curvature of the universe.

How many memory sticks would that take? Let's see, 30% overlap, 70 quadrillion light years. . .

Seriously though, a "radial" panorama is every bit as valid as a "linear" one, I would say.

---John

Shay said:

To me a panorama is any photo outside the standard aspect ratio we
have come to think of as "normal"

Click to expand...

If I create a stitched photo made of 3 rows, each row consists of 3 photos, I end with a "standard" aspect ratio photo. Is this not a panorama?

Yehuda

Shay said:

To me a panorama is any photo outside the standard aspect ratio we
have come to think of as "normal" that shows you more of a scene
than any one "standard" photo could ever show you.

Click to expand...

Hi! I'm a newbie (& non-pro).

If I stand on a certain spot & turn my head slowly from left to right & looking at the view, thats the panorama I see. Shay's sentence fits.

The problem I see in photos composed of several shots (take from the left to the right and are cropped & stitched to make a panorama) and there is a long straight horizontal line (like a long fence, long road, etc) that is included in most of the shots. The fence would look funny at the stiched portion.

When one moves the camera parallel to the view to get several shots(airplane style shots) I think its still a panorama, with better rendition of straight lines. You still have to take more shots & crop both ends to minimize the hourglass effect.(But the hourglass effect is still there.) Plus the physical limitations of how much one can move the camera as mentioned by someone in this thread.

For me, the best presentation of a panorama picture would be like those done by APS cameras on "panoramic" setting, where the top & bottom of the film is drastically "cut." I also see very old panoramic pictures made in the 50's.
So I would say BOTH methods produce "a" panorama. MH 2 cents O.

That's an interesting question. Although the image is composed of many seperate photos and processed like a panorama, I don't think it actually is a panorama unless it has an aspect ratio much longer than 4:3 or 3:2. The reason for making such an image usually is to get a higher resolution image than is capable with the camera as opposed to a longer aspect ratio than is capable with the camera. I think it would be tough to call a standard aspect ratio (4:3 or 3:2) photo a panorama regardless of how it was made. At best you could call it a wide angle photo if it had a wider angle than the normal lens allows.

Is this a panorama? It is cropped from a single frame. Your thoughts?

it looks like a panorama, even though it was not made like one but just cropped, it does have the wide aspect ratio. So it would fit into the "If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck..." hehehe

You Wish said:

Is this a panorama? It is cropped from a single frame. Your thoughts?

Click to expand...