Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 20 May 2008 at 18:40 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thank you for your input.
I bought PTgui and Pano2VR. I also bought a Macbook Pro recently, and just installed the mac versions on the new computer. I am very happy with these programs so far. I also just received my Panosaurus in the mail a few weeks ago before my wife and I went on a road trip. I took it with me and tried doing a few panoramas, but have yet to stitch them in PTgui. I am also finishing my first virtual tour (pro bono) of a house for sale in my area. So much to do, but no time to do it 
Thank you all once again for all your help! I still have lots to learn, but have learned a lot thus far!
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 21 Apr 2008 at 2:54 GMT
|
go to thread
|
I just read through that page on Hans Nyberg's site. I have a few questions about what I read:
"The cylindric projection can be used for QTVR movies with a vertical view as high as 160 degrees but practically it is better to convert it to a spheric if you have a larger FOV than 110 degrees. You can then ad black canvas to make it a full equirectangular image and when you make the cubic QTVR movie you restrict the view to the actual image."
Back to the subject of cylindrical vs. spherical. I know you guys mention (as does Hans) that you can output to spherical and limit the vertical FOV/tilt. Why is is more practical to do this? Hans mentions doing this only if your vertical FOV is larger than 110 degrees. In the 2 row living room panoramic I showed you a few posts ago, I think the FOV was only about 70 degrees. Why then would I want to display the image as spherical instead of cylindrical? Also why does Hans use 110 degrees as a guideline? Sorry if I am missing something; I guess I just don't completely understand why yet.
"Use manual mode with same exposure for all images."
Is it a bad thing if I raise or lower the exposure at certain points by one stop only? The last shoot I did, when I got to the bright sunny window, I made the shutter speed one stop quicker. And when I got the the dark corner of the room, I slowed the shutter down by one shot. Do you guys ever do this? I haven't tried stitching that one yet; hopefully tomorrow.
"Fisheye lenses are popular for spherical panoramas as you can cover a full view with only 3-8 images."
I have read that the Sigma 8mm F3.5 is popular for this. My DSLR is the Sony A100 (the successor to the Minolta DSLRs, since Minolta sold their technologies to Sony before they shut down their camera division). Sony also has their own 16mm F2.8 fisheye lens. My camera's sensor is a 10 megapixel APS-C CCD. With Sony's fisheye and my APS-C sensor, how would I figure out the FOV so that I know how many pictures are required to cover 360 degrees? Since both of these lenses are around the same price range, what lens do you think would better suit panoramic photography? How is Sigma in quality compared to other lens manufacturers?
By reading Dorin's posts here on panoguide, I understand that you would get better resolution and better quality panoramics by shooting with a non-fisheye lens. Right now I have an 18-70mm lens that would serve me well for this. However, if I do end up getting into local real estate tours, the fisheye might be a good future investment for the time it might save I would think. Or does shooting with a fisheye require more time to stitch on the software end?
Thanks again in advance. I apologize for asking so many questions. Some of them may be dumb ones I know. I am still just an aspiring amateur photographer who has A LOT to learn!
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 20 Apr 2008 at 21:38 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thank you for the link Irieman. There looks to be a lot of great information on Hans' website.
Thank you all once again; I really appreciate all of your help!
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 19 Apr 2008 at 20:47 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
Good to know. Thank you John. (By the way, my wife and I were looking at your QTVRs on your website yesterday. They are beautiful!)
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 19 Apr 2008 at 19:10 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thanks Michael and John. So outputting cylindrical panoramas is a bad idea because of the way the viewer projects the image? Equirectangular is used for spherical images then? But using that format and limiting the tilt will yield better results than cylindrical? I am understanding this correctly?
All of these different input formats are a bit confusing to me. Let me see if I have this right:
-Cylindrical (Just for wide angle panoramas; does not include nadir/zenith shots)
-Equirectangular (For "spherical" panoramas; includes nadir/zenith shots)
-Cube Faces (Another "spherical" format generated by some other stitching programs? This is an input type in Pano2VR.)
I guess what confuses me is that when I look at other QuicktimeVR spherical movies, when they are loading they look like low resolution cube faces (as in you can see 6 sides of a cube). As the image loads into higher resolution, it gets harder to tell where those cube faces are because now your mind if focusing on the projection of space. Does this mean that if I output an equirectangular image from PTgui, Pano2VR is converting this into cube faces for the final projection anyway? If so, why does PTgui not export to cube faces directly?
Also, in Pano2VR I know you can convert between input image types. Why would you want to convert between input image types?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 19 Apr 2008 at 17:18 GMT
updated: 19 Apr 2008 at 17:20 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
I see what you mean about the picture; good to know for next time. Would it be a bad thing to define horizontal control points on the top and bottom of the picture frame in the pictures that contain it? Or are the horizontal control points more meant for use on the horizon line?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 19 Apr 2008 at 15:04 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Well, here is my first 2 row panorama:
www.aurorafxstudios.com/test_pano/2rowlivingroom....
I had to do some editing to the layers in Photoshop (just like you said John). Hopefully I won't have to spend so much time in Photoshop once I get the Panosaurus and learn how to use it. Smartblend did help in other areas of the image though (the television was misaligned using PTgui blending, but fine with Smartblend). Again, this was probably a problem with my parallax since I did define extra control points for the TV. I also should have used some flash to fill the dark spots in the room a bit. I guess this is where the HDR capability of PTgui Pro could come in handy later on (I just got the single user license for now). I also made the mistake of batch resizing the images in Photoshop to 800x600 before I even stitched them. Viewing it full screen kind of stretches the image a bit. Next time I will work with the full size images, and then I can resize it at the end of my workflow if I need to.
I think it is alright for my first 2-row though. Any advice or constructive criticism from what you see?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 19 Apr 2008 at 13:45 GMT
|
go to thread
|
I would just like to thank you all once again for your help and support. I really appreciate it.
Upon looking at competing products as well as pricing, I finally decided on PTgui and Pano2VR. I know there is some tough competition when it comes to these products, however these ones seem to be worth the most value to me (especially for their price). Since I have not purchased a mac yet (and since I still might be working on PCs from time to time) I value the idea of cross platform software. These are also the programs I have the most experience with in using their trial versions.
As far as hardware goes, I decided on the Panosaurus strictly for it's cost. I definately see the value of getting a good sturdy pano head, but since I am still only learning I felt it would be a good idea to get some experience first with a cheaper product first. I have access to a machine shop, but I figure it would be nice to have an example product that I could use for a while before I attempt to make one. This way I could take what I like from the Panosaurus, and change what I don't like. The reviews and testimonials I have read on this product seemed really positive as well (for a starter head anyway).
If in the future I begin to do panos more frequently and/or professionally, then I can always re-evaluate my hardware/software if need be.
So once again, thank you all. You will see me around; but I will try not to post any more "how-to" questions until I have read a few tutorials and tried doing a few panos properly with the Panosaurus. I get the feeling that if I learn to use a pano head and shoot properly, that will eliminate many of my frustrations and make the software side a little bit easier 
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 18 Apr 2008 at 20:54 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
I agree with you wholeheartedly Irieman. I am definately going to make some purchases. PTgui has been good to me so far. I think my problems lie in the fact that I have parallax problems with my 029 head. However, before I buy a PTgui license, I just want to be educated about all the software that is available. I am 90% sure I am going to buy PTgui at this point as I am very happy with it so far. However, I haven't even touched EasyPano or Realviz yet.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 18 Apr 2008 at 19:24 GMT
updated: 18 Apr 2008 at 19:29 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thanks John. I guess I will look into buying a Pano head If I get a proper pano head, would I still need my 029 for regular family shots and stuff? Would a pano head be solid enough to replace my 029 completely?
I just looked at Manfrotto's site. They have a few Pano VR heads. Has anyone here had experience with them? What other brands would you recommend?
Back onto software. I see all this software buy EasyPano and Realviz. Are any of them worth looking into over PTgui? I know this could come down to preference for some. As far as features go, are any of these other programs as powerful as PTgui? I just don't want to buy PTgui if I end up finding something better down the road.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 18 Apr 2008 at 18:04 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thank you John. I do not have a pano head yet. It is just a regular three way Manfrotto head (the 029). I really am beginning to like PTgui compared to the few other program demos I have tried. I may even buy it in the next day or two. If I do buy it, would using PToptimizer in the full version, along with t3 and t4 control points help manipulate/distort my image enough to help correct my parallax? Or would I still have to do major photoshop work after? I guess what I am asking is if there is ANY way I can get PTgui to fix my parallax (even if it is more work to get it to do so)?
I am doing my first virtual tour for a real estate agent right now. I took the pictures last week. It is a pro bono job with no time limits. I do not plan on selling myself until I am confident with this stuff; even if it takes months. I told them that this was my first tour and that I would do it for free since I have never done them before. She is also in no rush as it is a house that she thinks will sell without the virtual tour. She is doing this more for my benefit so I can get into this practicing with real life examples. Three of my panoramas are single row. The fourth one is a 2 row. Since ditching Photoshop CS3's Photomerge, I have been quite successful stitching single row panoramas with PTgui; it is the 2 row panoramas I find troublesome.
I will definately look into getting a pano head soon; I definately see the importance of eliminating parallax. It would make PTgui's job much easier.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 18 Apr 2008 at 16:13 GMT
updated: 18 Apr 2008 at 16:21 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thank you all once again for the info and links! I am learning a lot.
John H, your tutorials are great. I will probably be reading them for years to come, as some of them are definitely more advanced than I can handle at this time. Thank you for them as well.
On the subject of Line control points (eg. t1, t2, t3), I have a test panorama of my living room at home here that I am having problems with. It is my first 2 row pano that I did. I am having problems with doors lining up from the top row picture to the bottom row picture. I tried using the vertical line control points, as well as the t3 line control points but still have no success. Here is a crop of my trouble doors:
Any advice on how to fix this?
After I define new control points, do I have to optimize the pano before creating a jpg? After I put the vertical line and line(t3) control points on the doors, I tried optimizing it with PTgui's optimizer and it doesn't seem to help. Since I am still on the demo version, I cannot use PToptimizer. Is PToptimizer better than PTgui's built in optimizer for stuff like this?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 18 Apr 2008 at 4:07 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Thanks Klaus for your input, as well as the tutorials link. It looks like there is a lot of great information there.
I've been playing with hugin for a while now, but I actually do not like it's control point system as much. I found that in a detailed image, if I was defining control points from scratch (not allowing the program to find them automatically), it took sometimes 5-10 control points or more before it starting finding the second control point in the other image automatically. In PTgui, it seemed to happen after the first few control points. However, they both run on the Panorama Tools engine right? Why would it seem less sensitive than PTgui? I also like the magnifier in PTgui; I found it very handy. However, my opinion of hugin so far is probably pretty shallow as I have only played with it for about 10 minutes. I will keep playing with it though to see what I think after a few more panos.
I am beginning to really like PTgui. However, I still find using the panorama editor (where you drag and rotate the pictures) to be very awkward; especially when trying to straighten a horizon. Sometimes it seems like when I click and drag, it just makes the horizon worse. I assume this part of the program takes some getting used to.
Back on the subject of movie compilers, Cubic Converter only does QTVR right (not flash)? I know Pano2VR does both (and is cross platform which is nice). What other contenders are out there for mac? Are there any others that do flash?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Tips & Tricks
Thread:
ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
|
Re: ptgui, ptmac, hugin, pano2VR, photoshop
Posted: 17 Apr 2008 at 22:51 GMT
|
go to thread
|
I am sure there are tutorials on how to calibrate your lens. What does this do though? Is it something you physically do to your lens? Or is it done on the software end?
Just to clarify, I haven't bought a mac yet. I plan to in the next month or so though. Still just doing research. For now, I need to find a solution that is cross platform so that I can do panos on both my PC and a mac. This is why I was interested in PTgui, and also why I am interested in how PTgui compares between the PC and the mac version.
As far as shortcuts go, has anyone had success with the mirrorball approach?
Cubic Converter looks good. It looks like it does not compile flash movies though, which is something I was interested in. Thank you for the recommendation; I will look into it.
Lastly, what is tonemapping, and why would you need something like xfuse or bracketeer? You say I can specify them as the blender in PTgui on the PC? Does this mean I would be getting the advantages of those programs right in PTgui? Or are they just available for PTgui's mac version?
By the way, thank you for your reply. I appreciate the information!!
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Prev
