Reading mode: Light Dark

Flat or Cylindrical panorama?

Go to last post
moimoi

moimoi

Veteran Member
Messages
6,293
Reaction score
2,722
Location
Washington, DC, US
Dear all,

The following panorama is made of a stitch of 10 individual vertical frames. All shots were handheld (I did not have a tripod).

Here are two versions:

Flat panorama



Cylindrical



I kind of like the distorted view of the cylindrical model. What do you think?

Thanks for any comments,

moimoi
 
Personally, I like the distorted one as well. It gives the view a greater sense of scale and depth.

Cheers and Great capture,
Gratus
 
moimoi said:
I kind of like the distorted view of the cylindrical model. What do you think?
Click to expand...
I prefer the cylindrical model, primarily because the field appears to be closer to flat in that view. And I know it does not slope like the Flat view shows. To my mind it's questionable which view you call distorted.
 
Gratusphoto said:
Personally, I like the distorted one as well. It gives the view a greater sense of scale and depth.

Cheers and Great capture,
Gratus
Click to expand...
I'm pretty much with Gratus on this one too - my vote goes to the cylindrical version
 
I agree with the comments.

Here is a larger version:

 
Flat

In the curved view, my eyes go right to that curved baseline and it also looks squashed overall.
 
It has to be the "distorted" versio. If you learn take notice of your peripheral vision, you'll realize that the distorted version is closer to what the eye sees. Sit in your car, looking straight ahead and use your peripheral vision to trace the curb on the opposite side of the road - interesting that most people look, but far from everyone ever learns to see!
 
sybersitizen said:
crimliar said:
... interesting that most people look, but far from everyone ever learns to see!
Click to expand...
Pseudo-intellectualism at its best.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't see that Einstein-esque warped 3rd baseline and bowl-like/squashed field of vision with the naked eye! LOL

This is why I don't care for fisheye lenses.
 
I made some in-camera-panos with my A77. The results were somewere different:

At first a pano taken with my Tammy 10-20. It shows Gaiselberg near Zistersdorf, Lower Austria. It is a threefold mediveal ring wall around a lost wooden fortification, about 1000 years old. Good pictures you may only get from the air, but the more than 180° pano gives some good impression.





The other was taken from a house in Mauthausen, Upper Austria. There I could not go back to get it with my wide angle, and so I decided to make a pano. But with architecture the cylindric distortion really hurts me.





What do you think?
 
I think they are both great, but i prefer the cylindric one. Very nice panorama anyway, i often find panoramas to be even more interresting if they arent nescesarrily a landscape, but in a city or a stadium like you posted.
--
To snap, or not to snap
 
zigge said:
I think they are both great, but i prefer the cylindric one. Very nice panorama anyway, i often find panoramas to be even more interresting if they arent nescesarrily a landscape, but in a city or a stadium like you posted.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the nice comment. I rend to agree with you. Cityscapes are great pano subjects!
zigge said:
--
To snap, or not to snap
Click to expand...
 
I like the flat view for scenes that are relatively close or have strong linear references, like the foul line.

The following are images I captured with the in camera panorama. Heaver distortion on the second.









--
Sarge

A77, A700 8mm Bower, 50mm 1.7, 35-70 F4, 90mm Tamron, 18-250 Sigma, 70-200 Sigma & 50-500 Bigma
Fisheye photos at http://sony-snapper.com/Fish-Eye/index.html
Toys - Asus Transformer Android 4.0.3 tablet
  • Colorspace UDMA 500 gb
Albums at http://www.sony-snapper.com
 
Hmmm, I think the second one looks pretty weird. There is some sort of heavy distorsion (each individual shots were shot at 18 mm = 27 mm eq. FF).

Have you tried to process this via Hugin or any other stitching programs? I think shooting wide (maybe wider than 30-35 mm eq. FF) makes it more difficult (unless shot using a tripod) to get a very low rms.
 
moimoi said:
Hmmm, I think the second one looks pretty weird. There is some sort of heavy distorsion (each individual shots were shot at 18 mm = 27 mm eq. FF).

Have you tried to process this via Hugin or any other stitching programs? Nope: This was kind of a shoot and forget. I go to the stadium at least 20 times a year and I have several non distorted panos from prior visits. These were the first time I have used the internal stitching in the stadium.

I think shooting wide (maybe wider than 30-35 mm eq. FF) makes it more difficult (unless shot using a tripod) to get a very low rms.
Click to expand...
From the lower third base position perspective 18/27mm is about the only focal length that will include the foreground as well as the top of the stadium

--
Sarge

A77, A700 8mm Bower, 50mm 1.7, 35-70 F4, 90mm Tamron, 18-250 Sigma, 70-200 Sigma & 50-500 Bigma
Fisheye photos at http://sony-snapper.com/Fish-Eye/index.html
Toys - Asus Transformer Android 4.0.3 tablet
  • Colorspace UDMA 500 gb
Albums at http://www.sony-snapper.com
 
Edward Sargent said:
moimoi said:
Hmmm, I think the second one looks pretty weird. There is some sort of heavy distorsion (each individual shots were shot at 18 mm = 27 mm eq. FF).

Have you tried to process this via Hugin or any other stitching programs? Nope: This was kind of a shoot and forget. I go to the stadium at least 20 times a year and I have several non distorted panos from prior visits. These were the first time I have used the internal stitching in the stadium.

I think shooting wide (maybe wider than 30-35 mm eq. FF) makes it more difficult (unless shot using a tripod) to get a very low rms.
Click to expand...
From the lower third base position perspective 18/27mm is about the only focal length that will include the foreground as well as the top of the stadium
Click to expand...
Have you tried to shoot with vertical frames at let's say 35mm (mine was shot at 35mm on an a900)? I found this easier to shoot, and you get more resolution, but you have to shoot more frames.
Edward Sargent said:
--
Sarge

A77, A700 8mm Bower, 50mm 1.7, 35-70 F4, 90mm Tamron, 18-250 Sigma, 70-200 Sigma & 50-500 Bigma
Fisheye photos at http://sony-snapper.com/Fish-Eye/index.html
Toys - Asus Transformer Android 4.0.3 tablet
  • Colorspace UDMA 500 gb
Albums at http://www.sony-snapper.com
Click to expand...
 
The in camera ones were vertical. When I use the tried and true stitching I only use vertical if I have a tripod. I found I can consitantly pan and shoot horizontal frames hand held but have a poor success rate with vertical hand held. Note that in the past 30% of my frames are for panoramas, the two trips I took this year all my panoramas (about 50) were in camera.

--
Sarge

A77, A700 8mm Bower, 50mm 1.7, 35-70 F4, 90mm Tamron, 18-250 Sigma, 70-200 Sigma & 50-500 Bigma
Fisheye photos at http://sony-snapper.com/Fish-Eye/index.html
Toys - Asus Transformer Android 4.0.3 tablet
  • Colorspace UDMA 500 gb
Albums at http://www.sony-snapper.com
 
Edward Sargent said:
The in camera ones were vertical. When I use the tried and true stitching I only use vertical if I have a tripod
Click to expand...
I do the same. With tripod, the stitching is indeed dead easy.
Edward Sargent said:
. I found I can consitantly pan and shoot horizontal frames hand held but have a poor success rate with vertical hand held. Note that in the past 30% of my frames are for panoramas, the two trips I took this year all my panoramas (about 50) were in camera.
Click to expand...
Hmmm...any links for those pano, I want to see (I like more and more pano).

Cheers,

moimoi
Edward Sargent said:
--
Sarge

A77, A700 8mm Bower, 50mm 1.7, 35-70 F4, 90mm Tamron, 18-250 Sigma, 70-200 Sigma & 50-500 Bigma
Fisheye photos at http://sony-snapper.com/Fish-Eye/index.html
Toys - Asus Transformer Android 4.0.3 tablet
  • Colorspace UDMA 500 gb
Albums at http://www.sony-snapper.com
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top