Posted by Michael Sayles on December 15, 2006 at 6:21 AM
This is a stitched Pano of 4 shots taken last weekend (the same time as my previous 'Pikes' post). Once I'd quickly bagged the 'ordinary' shots (before the break in the clouds had chance to disappear) I had a bit more time to set up the tripod for some shots with which to create a panoramic image.
The techs were something like 1/4 sec at f22 for each shot (or very slight variations thereof), taken at 17mm. Just a two-stop ND grad used. In this JPEG some of the clouds top-left look a little hot, but no highlights of the original RAWs are blown.
The different perspectives caused by the close proximity of the foreground and the distant fells caused a few problems when stitching the individual images (it's amazing what difference is made by rotating the camera a few degrees!) but I got there in the end...
I've had this printed at 30"x12" and it looks pretty good.
Very nice, but being a pano person some would say that I am bias.
On improvements, I would like to have seen the top of the bottom ridge in the immediate foreground continued in the frame to the bottom RHS as this would have bounded the valley floor and created a river of patchwork green. This may? have been acheived by by just rotating the view right and down a small bit, I take it the shots were shot in portrait orientation.
The light going up the central valley on the LHS needs a wee bit of S&H.
I have to admit that having done this with a straight 35mm and a 45mm TS-E, the results are easier to stitch on the TS-E. The 45mm TS-E, in portrait format, was simply shifted L, Center, Right,
I have also done it with a 24mm TS-E but the angle of view makes it much harder especially as the nodal points are harder to judge.
What tripod head did you use (Man 410) and what is the total angle of view in the photo? 180 degrees?
Ever considered a 617 or even a 624 - there is a fotoman on ebay at the moment.
Posted by John Chapman on December 15, 2006 at 11:34 AM
Hi Michael
I think it is an excellent picture.
John
Aberdeen
Posted by Chris Lloyd on December 15, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Beautifully done Michael. I love the lighting on the mountains. Superb!
Posted by Sean Bolton on December 15, 2006 at 3:47 PM
Hi Michael
This is a stunning landscape shot, great colours and sense of scale. Colin Prior would be proud of this one. Stitching job looks decent to me, I expect a large print looks even better.
I noticed you used f22 for this shot. Generally lenses are optically at their best in the f5.6 to f11 range and sharpness starts to fall off when stopping down beyond f11. So for a landscape shot like this were effectively everything is at infinity you might get a slightly better quality result shooting at f8 or f11. Also at 17mm on a cropped sensor camera you won't be struggling for depth of field, even at f8. Save f22 for those extreme shots with very close and very far subjects in the frame.
Quality image though, would love to have it in my portfolio, just need to revisit when there is a bit of snow on the peaks to get some winter looking variations.
cheers
Sean
Posted by John Lee on December 15, 2006 at 5:23 PM
Hi Michael
Lovely well composed panorama and I love the the light on the mountains. My only nit would be that the clouds top left seem to be very hot on my monitor and theblue sky seems to have gone a slightly odd tone. Was the sun just out of this part of the image? Other than that a lovely landscape.
A beautiful scene captured,stitched and processed really well.
Posted by Michael Sayles on December 19, 2006 at 12:22 PM
Thanks for the feedback and comments folks. I shall do my best to respond to any suggestions!!
I would like to have seen the top of the bottom ridge in the immediate foreground continued in the frame to the bottom RHS as this would have bounded the valley floor and created a river of patchwork green.
Yep, I see what you mean Tom. The reason for this composition was to have the valley leading into the frame from the bottom corner. I think having the immediate foreground right across the bottom of the picture would have created a bit of a visual barrier.
The light going up the central valley on the LHS needs a wee bit of S&H
To be honest I'm not sure which bit you mean!!
I noticed you used f22 for this shot...
Yes, I know the lens isn't quite as sharp at f22. However, with the close proximity of the immediate foreground (about 3 feet) and the distant fells, I wanted maximum DoF, so I didn't want to take the risk. To be honest, I'm not at all disappointed with the sharpness in the image, having used f22. The immediate foreground is crisp, and the detail on the distant fells is also nice and sharp.
My only nit would be that the clouds top left seem to be very hot on my monitor and theblue sky seems to have gone a slightly odd tone. Was the sun just out of this part of the image?
As I mentioned in the OP, the clouds top-left do seem a bit hot in this JPEG. However, there are no clipped highlights in the RAW files. It's just a product of the JPEG conversion I think. The sun was just outside of frame to the left. The sky tones are as they were. If you go to the Lake District frequently in winter you will notice that the colour in the sky (especially in the afternoon) can be quite incredible. Thick rainclouds often have a strange (but attractive) bluish-grey colour (in fact the clouds in the central part of this pic have a blue colour to them), and the blue in the sky can be striking. Looking at this picture, I can't say that it's anything but an accurate reflection of the scene at the time. In fact, I returned to the very same spot this weekend with some friends who were over from Finland, and the conditions were very similar. The guys from Finland were amazed by the light, and one of them said he'd trade the Aurora Borealis for winter lake district light "back home"!
Oh, BTW, the angle of view in this pic is probably around 110-120 deg - at a guess.
Thanks for the comments and feedback. Sorry if my responses seem dismissive - I don't mean to be - I'm just trying to give more background info!
Discussion
8 repliesThe techs were something like 1/4 sec at f22 for each shot (or very slight variations thereof), taken at 17mm. Just a two-stop ND grad used. In this JPEG some of the clouds top-left look a little hot, but no highlights of the original RAWs are blown.
The different perspectives caused by the close proximity of the foreground and the distant fells caused a few problems when stitching the individual images (it's amazing what difference is made by rotating the camera a few degrees!) but I got there in the end...
I've had this printed at 30"x12" and it looks pretty good.
Cheers,
Michael S
On improvements, I would like to have seen the top of the bottom ridge in the immediate foreground continued in the frame to the bottom RHS as this would have bounded the valley floor and created a river of patchwork green. This may? have been acheived by by just rotating the view right and down a small bit, I take it the shots were shot in portrait orientation.
The light going up the central valley on the LHS needs a wee bit of S&H.
I have to admit that having done this with a straight 35mm and a 45mm TS-E, the results are easier to stitch on the TS-E. The 45mm TS-E, in portrait format, was simply shifted L, Center, Right,
I have also done it with a 24mm TS-E but the angle of view makes it much harder especially as the nodal points are harder to judge.
What tripod head did you use (Man 410) and what is the total angle of view in the photo? 180 degrees?
Ever considered a 617 or even a 624 - there is a fotoman on ebay at the moment.
I think it is an excellent picture.
John
Aberdeen
Regards Chris
www.c-m-l.com
MJ
This is a stunning landscape shot, great colours and sense of scale. Colin Prior would be proud of this one. Stitching job looks decent to me, I expect a large print looks even better.
I noticed you used f22 for this shot. Generally lenses are optically at their best in the f5.6 to f11 range and sharpness starts to fall off when stopping down beyond f11. So for a landscape shot like this were effectively everything is at infinity you might get a slightly better quality result shooting at f8 or f11. Also at 17mm on a cropped sensor camera you won't be struggling for depth of field, even at f8. Save f22 for those extreme shots with very close and very far subjects in the frame.
Quality image though, would love to have it in my portfolio, just need to revisit when there is a bit of snow on the peaks to get some winter looking variations.
cheers
Sean
Lovely well composed panorama and I love the the light on the mountains. My only nit would be that the clouds top left seem to be very hot on my monitor and theblue sky seems to have gone a slightly odd tone. Was the sun just out of this part of the image? Other than that a lovely landscape.
Regards
John Lee
Yep, I see what you mean Tom. The reason for this composition was to have the valley leading into the frame from the bottom corner. I think having the immediate foreground right across the bottom of the picture would have created a bit of a visual barrier.
To be honest I'm not sure which bit you mean!!
Yes, I know the lens isn't quite as sharp at f22. However, with the close proximity of the immediate foreground (about 3 feet) and the distant fells, I wanted maximum DoF, so I didn't want to take the risk. To be honest, I'm not at all disappointed with the sharpness in the image, having used f22. The immediate foreground is crisp, and the detail on the distant fells is also nice and sharp.
As I mentioned in the OP, the clouds top-left do seem a bit hot in this JPEG. However, there are no clipped highlights in the RAW files. It's just a product of the JPEG conversion I think. The sun was just outside of frame to the left. The sky tones are as they were. If you go to the Lake District frequently in winter you will notice that the colour in the sky (especially in the afternoon) can be quite incredible. Thick rainclouds often have a strange (but attractive) bluish-grey colour (in fact the clouds in the central part of this pic have a blue colour to them), and the blue in the sky can be striking. Looking at this picture, I can't say that it's anything but an accurate reflection of the scene at the time. In fact, I returned to the very same spot this weekend with some friends who were over from Finland, and the conditions were very similar. The guys from Finland were amazed by the light, and one of them said he'd trade the Aurora Borealis for winter lake district light "back home"!
Oh, BTW, the angle of view in this pic is probably around 110-120 deg - at a guess.
Thanks for the comments and feedback. Sorry if my responses seem dismissive - I don't mean to be - I'm just trying to give more background info!
Cheers,
Michael S