Forum/thread	Message
Forum: Q & A Thread: Product dedicated for Peleng and Zenitar fisheye?	Re: Product dedicated for Peleng and Zenitar fisheye? Posted: 17 Jul 2008 at 1:04 GMT go to thread Nick, "Do you use Nikon 16mm on 14N often? Does it give better pictures from 10.5mm on D2x" Well, the two set ups are very similar in terms of FOV. I use exactly the same shooting sequences and get very comparable images. The D2X (mounted on the NN5) may have a very slight edge, but noticeable only at the extremes of cropping. But not even sure of that as my initial work with the 14N (mounted on the panosaurus) was with jpgs and now I shoot raw to tif with the D2X. Haven't compared with a raw to tif with the 14N. As the 14N is zero'd on the Panosaurus I have left it there and not bothered finding the NPP with it on the NN5, leaving that head dedicated for the D2X. I need both a FF camera for my 20mm and 28mm lenses AND the crop factor of the D2X for boosted telephoto work. So I swap out a lot but always have a pan head ready. And just what surprise gadget/gizmo might you have in the works? Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: Product dedicated for Peleng and Zenitar fisheye?	Re: Product dedicated for Peleng and Zenitar fisheye? Posted: 16 Jul 2008 at 13:58 GMT go to thread Nick, I can't speak to the Zenitar. I have the Peleng and, like the Panosaurus, it was an introduction/learning tool until I was sure I wanted to jump into this more aggressively. I now have the Nik 10.5 for my D2X and the Nik 16mm for my full frame Kodak 14N, and the NN5. My guess is that many, perhaps as much as 1/3 of the posters here (I'm pulling numbers out of the air and guessing based on the familiarity and experience with Pelengs that comes out when there is a question about them) have had a similar experience and evolution. Since I'm primarily interested in outdoor scenic pans at the highest resolution the Peleng is sitting unused, and not sure when it might get re-activated unless my interests or demands morph in another direction. But it was a hoot to use and I made some very good pans with it. No, I don't feel neglected. But I would be happy to let you play with my Peleng and sometime in the future we might work out a trade for something. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: Panosaurus Head	Re: Panosaurus Head Posted: 27 Jun 2008 at 14:04 GMT go to thread Ditto all of the above. Intro head. Low tech. Inexpensive. Fully functional. With my set up, Kodak 14N and D2x I did some cutting and grinding so I could rotate the camera arm straight down so I could shoot straight up. Relatively easy to do with the Pan and you don't feel like you are pounding on a swiss watch with a sledgehammer. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: Using Two (2) Cameras Side-By-Side For 180 Pano? Anyone?	Re: Using Two (2) Cameras Side-By-Side For 180 Pano? Anyone? Posted: 8 Jun 2008 at 0:42 GMT go to thread Steven, You are going to a LOT of trouble to solve the "problem" of moving waves. Starting at: www.flyfishingfotography.com/hookipa_024.htm the following 8 pictures are 180 panos constructed out of 4-5 handheld shots at Hookipa, HI. These are much bigger breakers than you are likely to find on Maui. In the preceeding shots there are a mix of single shots and (handheld) multi-row conposites. My point is you can see how moving breakers come out when there are multiple shots. In many cases you are not able to really see a difference. And when you can, it is minor. In my experience the situation where the wave action complicates a multi-shot pano is when there is a relatively close, flat beach with a large wave incursion and runoff. Then, with multiple shots, you might end up with 30' or more of wave that is missing from the adjacent shot. But then you could play the timing game. If your shots are going to be so distant that there will not be a parallax problem, then I doubt you'll see enough detail of the breakers that you will see the difference. But, every situation is different. Let us know how this works out. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: Panosaurus Spherical Calibration	Re: Panosaurus Spherical Calibration Posted: 3 May 2008 at 4:15 GMT go to thread You are starting at the beginning of a very complex process. The Panosaurus is perfectly adequate. There are no "grooves". You need to go through the process of establishing correct camera position and the "non-parallax point", also called nodal point and entrance pupil. Then you need to establish the correct shooting sequences in terms of number of rows, shots around, degrees between rotation for your particular camera and lens. THEN you are ready to feed a stitcher. There are many, many articles and tutorials online and in the archives here to help you establish the first two issues. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: double or multiple monitors?	double or multiple monitors? Posted: 23 Apr 2008 at 22:21 GMT go to thread My search reveled no past discussion of this topic, which I have been toying with. All it takes to set up 2, or even 3 monitors side to side is a second, or third video card (in a desktop), the monitors, and tweaking the XP monitor settings. I have a friend (3000 miles away) who is set up this way and his screens wrap automatically and completely. This seems to me the ulitmate in tweaking the latent IMAX potential out of 360 pans. Has anyone played with it. Would one have to create one's movie at double width? I want to send my friend a file to play with. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try	Re: Fix#4 works for some! Others? Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 16:37 GMT go to thread Vilmer also reports on the other thread that it is now fixed for him. zxcvbnm, I owe you a big thanks....even tho I cannot pronounce your name. Does it sound like "xyzbcg" I was ready to consider anything to fix this short of a gender change. Well, maybe if I could have chosen the quality of the body parts. Peter Patricelli alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try	Re: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 15:53 GMT updated: 20 Apr 2008 at 15:55 GMT go to thread zxcbnm, You're right again. I just didn't look further into the address at ALL the slashes. Again, in the original address which I copied, they were ALL forward slashes. So something, somewhere reversed all my slashes. Boy, talk about a gremlin. Or a DRUID? Have I triggered the dreaded Stonehenge curse? They are hopefully all now corrected. Fix #4. Thanks for the continuing patience. Peter alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try	Re: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 14:55 GMT go to thread Fix #3. The http:// got switched somewhere to http:\\. That has been corrected. Vimer's posting of code may have buggered this thread for some, my guess. If you are having problems, respond on the original thread. Peter Patricelli alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: The "new", complete, STONEHENGE!	Re: The Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 14:52 GMT go to thread zxcbnm, You are AMAZING! Yes, the backslashes got changed somehow, somewhere. I first checked the source I did a ctrl-c copy to get the host site address and the slashes were correct. Somewhere in the process of ctrl-v inserting the links in my website program, then recopying etc., etc. they got reversed without my noticing. They are now corrected. On the other "retry" thread Vilmer's posting of code has buggered that (my guess). I could not reply to him but successfully replied (on another computer) to myself. Please retry and report? Thanks. Peter alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try	Re: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 14:31 GMT go to thread Vilmer, I am now typing this for the third time. Suddenly I cannot “respond” on my original computer on this forum, get a lock up. I am now on another computer altogether. Obviously I have internal problems, doing updates and virus scans now. What I was trying to reply is this: Fix#1 was removing the spaces in the file names. I have now implemented fix#2 which is removing the capital letter in the filename to small case. But the more important question is where the source of the html is?? Could it be coming from Quicktime itself?? I saved the .mov file with Quicktime’s auto-full-screen-and-play option. I assume Quicktime splices some html code onto the file to make that happen. Could THAT be the source of the problem?? Peter alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: The "new", complete, STONEHENGE!	Re: The Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 12:37 GMT go to thread Andrew, I am sure you are right and this is the problem. This was the first time I linked directly to the hosted file. By doing this I bypassed my web program which had been playing interference for me when it wrote it's own html. Therefore what worked (for me without problem, that is, spaces ) within the program does not work outside the program. That explains why the problem had not popped up on my website before. Thanks for the help and suggestions. Peter alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: "Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try	"Stonehenge" links fixed (I hope). Please re-try Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 12:28 GMT go to thread I think I have identified, with the astute help of forum members, what the problem is and why it works fine for some and not for others. Would those who had problems please re-try at least to see if my "fix" indeed gives a universal fix? And let me know? Thanks. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfotography.com alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: The "new", complete, STONEHENGE!	Re: The Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 12:22 GMT go to thread I have renamed removing spaces. Would everyone who had problems loading re-try at least to tell me whether this corrects the problem? Thanks. Peter alert moderator
Forum: Q & A Thread: The "new", complete, STONEHENGE!	Re: The Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 11:51 GMT go to thread zxcbnm, I suspect you are correct regarding the spaces. I am using XP and IE. There are several considerably larger reasons for me wanting to get this straight. Is it possible that the space issue only causes problems on .mov files? No one ever complains about loading problems or bad links with the regular pages with .jpg files. The next possibility is that this is the first time I linked directly to the host (and to THIS host) rather than loading the pano onto a page in my website and having it called through the website controlled and scripted, html system. I think by doing this I brought the whole space and %2 issue into play. When I first constructed my website I used the original version of Webeasy Professional. It was OK but had a lot of bugs. When I upgraded to the next version for stability the linking within the website was incompatible with what I already had constructed because of spacing "Sam Hill" versus "Sam_Hill" in the final html. Rather than go back and re-do the whole extensive original site I chose to do my construction of new site elements with the upgraded program but to upload the work to my host through the original version to keep the name conventions correct. That has worked, marginally and clunkily until now. I will rename and ask some of you who had problems to try again to see if I have solved the problem. Thanks. Peter Patricelli www.flyfishingfofography.com alert moderator