Panorama vs Single Frame

David Nall · Oct 26, 2013

Panorama resulted in 250mb file and Single frame file of 32.7mb shot at 24mm. Which do you prefer? Panorama was 2 rows and 12 frames shot at 70mm. Both shot with Nikon D800E and 24 70 2.8 lens. I cropped the single frame to panorama proportions. Which do you prefer?

Single Frame

Panorama

I am wondering if all the effort to shoot panoramas is really worth it. The D800E creates files large enough to print very large. Maybe not mural size, but big enough for 48 X 60 which is the largest size I have printed. Dave

--
Visit my gallery at http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/
View of Yosemite Valley, Bridalveil fall 4 frame vertical pano taken from the tunnel parking lot.

http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v58/p1109307522-2.jpg

hotdog321 · Oct 26, 2013

In this case, it doesn't make much difference unless you were printing it the size of a billboard. I think the real benefit to using multiple exposures is when you want a really, really wide shot. For instance, in a super wide shot, you might be able to cover it with a super wide angle, but the image may suffer because of the lens quality or file size. Or the shot just might not be possible with a standard lens.

In this case, I shot a single frame at 16mm because it was the only want to capture the image. The image suffers a little, but looked good in the paper:

all_digital · Oct 26, 2013

Both look good. What ever floats your boat is best for you.

wazu · Oct 26, 2013

With 36mp you can print sharp images up to around A1 size. With the panoram you can go full out billboard several meters square. On a computer screen it doesn't make any difference other than taking the stitch images and stitching them is a lot of extra work and nigh impossible when you have objectammoving around in the scene.

Take panos when your wide angle isn't wide enough.

Reilly Diefenbach · Oct 26, 2013

Dave, maybe you're devil's advocate here, but the panorama is much the better of the two, even considering the relatively modest width. The corners are sharp on the pano, not so the single shot. The trees are distorted and bent inwards on the single, upright on the pano. The wider the focal length, the weirder the sides and corners get. The pano has a lot less noise in the sky and finer detail, at least as downsized pretty heavily here. The pano took the downsize to 3000 a lot better.

I would have set the zoom for the same height, maybe around 30mm portrait in a single pass, which would have been plenty of pixels for just about any purpose short of a Gigapan. Multiple rows were useful for 12MP cameras, and even at that none of them could touch the detail available from an "e." I just don't see a point to multi row at 36 unfiltered.

David Nall · Oct 27, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach said:
Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Dave, maybe you're devil's advocate here, but the panorama is much the better of the two, even considering the relatively modest width. The corners are sharp on the pano, not so the single shot. The trees are distorted and bent inwards on the single, upright on the pano. The wider the focal length, the weirder the sides and corners get. The pano has a lot less noise in the sky and finer detail, at least as downsized pretty heavily here. The pano took the downsize to 3000 a lot better.

I would have set the zoom for the same height, maybe around 30mm portrait in a single pass, which would have been plenty of pixels for just about any purpose short of a Gigapan. Multiple rows were useful for 12MP cameras, and even at that none of them could touch the detail available from an "e." I just don't see a point to multi row at 36 unfiltered.

Thanks Reilly. Great comment and observations. What do you mean by your last sentence. Are you referring to the absence of the AA filter? Dave

capturef22 · Oct 27, 2013

Dave, that is one massive hunka rock! It's got a lot of different things going on in different parts of it and both are nice captures. Where is that anyways? I may not have caught the differences without Reilly's comments, but on closer inspection, I see he's spot-on.

I think your question regarding is it worth what it takes to do the panos may come back to your target audience. Or maybe it's as much about your vision / intention as a photographer when you compose the shot. Do you envision it being a big wall print (if so, maybe the pano is worth it) or something shared mostly via your website or forums (if so, maybe the pano is not worth it).

Obviously, the digital world has changed life for photographers, but also for viewers. If you're marketing to places that have the wall space and wherewithall to hang large landscape photos, I can see where the panos may be worth the trouble for the increased image quality. If we're talking screen savers and the like, maybe not.

Lastly, you might have opportunities for two or more alternate compositions cropped from this one image (for example). If the pano helps you pull something like that off, maybe again the increased quality from the pano is worthwhile.

David Nall · Oct 27, 2013

capturef22 said:
capturef22 wrote:

Dave, that is one massive hunka rock! It's got a lot of different things going on in different parts of it and both are nice captures. Where is that anyways? I may not have caught the differences without Reilly's comments, but on closer inspection, I see he's spot-on.

Thanks Capturef22 for your comment. This was shot at Glacier National Park last year in July. Did you happen to notice the waterfall gushing out of the middle of it. I don't recall the exact location, but I believe it is real close to Saint Mary's Lake.

capturef22 said:
I think your question regarding is it worth what it takes to do the panos may come back to your target audience. Or maybe it's as much about your vision / intention as a photographer when you compose the shot. Do you envision it being a big wall print (if so, maybe the pano is worth it) or something shared mostly via your website or forums (if so, maybe the pano is not worth it).

Actually I like the panoramas mainly for the lack of Keystoning that usually accompanies shots with ultra wide angle lenses.

capturef22 said:
Obviously, the digital world has changed life for photographers, but also for viewers. If you're marketing to places that have the wall space and wherewithall to hang large landscape photos, I can see where the panos may be worth the trouble for the increased image quality. If we're talking screen savers and the like, maybe not.

Lastly, you might have opportunities for two or more alternate compositions cropped from this one image (for example). If the pano helps you pull something like that off, maybe again the increased quality from the pano is worthwhile.

Great point. Thanks again for commenting. Dave

Reilly Diefenbach · Oct 27, 2013

Yes, the AA filter is going away for most manufacturers, and good riddance :^)

David Nall · Oct 28, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach said:
Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Yes, the AA filter is going away for most manufacturers, and good riddance :^)

I agree full completely, and have not had any problems with moire that I have noticed. Have you noticed any in your shots? Dave

Reilly Diefenbach · Oct 28, 2013

Nothing of any concern re landscape, ever.

Brightly lit fine feathers can cause it on any camera, but a single swipe with the moire brush in LR gets rid of it locally.

enlightphoto · Oct 30, 2013

David Nall said:
Panorama resulted in 250mb file and Single frame file of 32.7mb shot at 24mm. Which do you prefer? Panorama was 2 rows and 12 frames shot at 70mm. Both shot with Nikon D800E and 24 70 2.8 lens. I cropped the single frame to panorama proportions. Which do you prefer?

I am wondering if all the effort to shoot panoramas is really worth it. The D800E creates files large enough to print very large. Maybe not mural size, but big enough for 48 X 60 which is the largest size I have printed. Dave

=

David:

Both are almost equally nice; one's just a lot bigger. I don't really prefer either of them vs the other. But the earlier point about being worth it and your own motivations should answer your own questions, and we can just toss off opinions.

In my own opinion, the extra effort of shooting the pano should IMHO be saved for when the circumstance warrants; i.e. an exceptional scene or composition, and potential end use. If a composition simply dictates "Panorama" - then yes the effort is worth it. If you're shooting with large print in mind, then yes to that also.

In this case, I personally would have said Not worth the extra effort. It's a middle of the day shot, nice scene, nothing special, and the single D800 frame should produce an ample-sized print. A great Grab-the-shot-and-move-on-type scene. The same scene under better light, or weather, and that may well have been the deciding factor to take the extra effort.

For an example collection of some of my own panos, you can maybe see how I kind of applied that judgement of effort vs. scene into effect.

Panorama Pictures Panoramic format photos Panoramas pano images, Photo Print images, Premier Fine Art decor wall mural gallery.

Panoramic photos, panorama pictures, panorama-format images, framed photo picture print photographs wall mural decor art interior decoration, residential, commercial, corporate, office, Gary Crabbe Enlightened Images

enlightphoto.com

Hope that all helps.

JulesJ · Oct 31, 2013

I think you answered your own question, there is little difference in your example, so merging was not needed. Merging lots of images is only useful when you can't get the whole scene in one shot.

David Nall said:
Panorama resulted in 250mb file and Single frame file of 32.7mb shot at 24mm. Which do you prefer? Panorama was 2 rows and 12 frames shot at 70mm. Both shot with Nikon D800E and 24 70 2.8 lens. I cropped the single frame to panorama proportions. Which do you prefer?

Single Frame

Panorama

I am wondering if all the effort to shoot panoramas is really worth it. The D800E creates files large enough to print very large. Maybe not mural size, but big enough for 48 X 60 which is the largest size I have printed. Dave

--
Visit my gallery at http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/
View of Yosemite Valley, Bridalveil fall 4 frame vertical pano taken from the tunnel parking lot.
http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v58/p1109307522-2.jpg

Palindrome2004 · Oct 31, 2013

Because stitched image have a lot of information I have found in it by 100% view. The single shot may be over sharpened, I feel. As you know I apply panorama stitch to get higher resolution even if the image could be included in a single frame.

Cheers!
HAMADA

ShelNf · Oct 31, 2013

I agree that the single shot seems oversharpened, at least on my monitor. The pano seems to have a more natural look about it.

Reilly Diefenbach · Oct 31, 2013

Not to mention the trees growing straight, the sky a lot cleaner, the detail much better preserved on the downsize, etc. If ever there were a time to be fussy about this kind of stuff, it is landscape photography. The subject is made more interesting and realistic by getting the details and the geometry correct.

Keep in mind, folks, big prints are one thing, but we'll all be looking at 4K monitors in a few short years. Details will matter even more.

Captain Hook · Oct 31, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach said:
Not to mention the trees growing straight,

Indeed! :-D

@ the non-pano image, all the vegetation is growing towards the center of the image.

While the real one (the pano one

) is showing me irl trees and plants and rocks.

capturef22 · Nov 1, 2013

David Nall said:
Thanks Capturef22 for your comment. This was shot at Glacier National Park last year in July. Did you happen to notice the waterfall gushing out of the middle of it. I don't recall the exact location, but I believe it is real close to Saint Mary's Lake.

..........................................................................................................................................................

Thanks for the answers Dave. I did definitely notice the waterfall (2? Or more?). That's one of the things that got me thinking about getting quality crops from the full-size image. Perhaps not the ideal way to compose a photo, but it seems part of what we do at times is to break scenes into smaller pieces to feature a unique perspective. I'm rambling; maybe you get my drift.

David Nall · Nov 1, 2013

capturef22 said:
David Nall said:

Thanks Capturef22 for your comment. This was shot at Glacier National Park last year in July. Did you happen to notice the waterfall gushing out of the middle of it. I don't recall the exact location, but I believe it is real close to Saint Mary's Lake.

..........................................................................................................................................................

Thanks for the answers Dave. I did definitely notice the waterfall (2? Or more?). That's one of the things that got me thinking about getting quality crops from the full-size image. Perhaps not the ideal way to compose a photo, but it seems part of what we do at times is to break scenes into smaller pieces to feature a unique perspective. I'm rambling; maybe you get my drift.

Click to expand...

Maybe you missed it in my Panorama Critique thread. It was my last post and nobody commented on it so it slid into oblivion and is now of page 3. Anyhow I showed the original and 3 or 4 crops from within the pano. The original pano was about 260 mb. You can find it here if you are interested. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52347658

I just now did a crop of the Pano in this thread which shows three waterfalls. I didn't notice the two smaller one's until you mentioned it. Thanks for that. Dave

capturef22 said:
--
http://photorefuge.smugmug.com/

--
Visit my gallery at http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/
View of Yosemite Valley, Bridalveil fall 4 frame vertical pano taken from the tunnel parking lot.
http://davesphotography9173.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v58/p1109307522-2.jpg

Nicholas Bell · Nov 4, 2013

Reilly hits the important points on the head!

Most of the impact is lost when you have to scale to fit here.

I would add the enjoyment you get from the process of taking the photographs and creating the panorama. When it all comes together and looks good, there's something that adds a lot of value. Not to mention those of us who enjoy zooming in a bit and seeing what there is to see in the details.

I think my wife might think I were suffering from altitude sickness I only took one shot and said, "Ok, I'm done"

Lot's of reasons why panoramic shots are better than single frame shots

Impressive image, Dave.

Nick

Panorama vs Single Frame

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Attachments

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts