 Stuart U |
Why did this happen?
As for camera settings, I don't remember the exposure or F-stop, but I was using the "Kit lens" at ~ 20 mm. I can look up exact values from a different computer. Thanks for any ideas. Stuart
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
Check the EXIF data on each of the images to see if any of the camera settings changed for that image.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
robert G. Fately |
I'll offer a thought, Stuart. Perhaps what happened is that in the time it took you to pan the camera to that position the actual light in the sky changed just a little. Remember that the human eye/brain apparatus has a much wider dynamic range than film, but at the same time we cannot discern slight lighting variations. I recall an experiment done decades ago, where subjects viewed two identical rooms through 1-way mirrors and were asked to reduce the lighting in room B to where it was exactly half as bright as room A. Turns out the average reduction was something like 10-15% as bright as room A. As with hearing, sight is exponential in nature - what we perceive as twice as bright is more like 10-100 times as bright, if measured with a light meter. So, even though you couldn't tell with the naked eye, the film in the camera was getting slightly less light in the left shot than in the others.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Stuart U |
So I went back and looked at the settings for all of the pictures. All were at the same settings: 1/80; f/16.0; ISO 100; 18 mM. The day was very clear, with the only clouds in the Caldera and the sun at my back. I think there was less than 20 seconds between shots. Thus, I don't think it was a changing light issue.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
Are you certain the settings for all the images to be merged in Photoshop, specifically image sizings and dpi, were identical?
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Well, if that's a stitched 360 image, guessing you're seeing just the basic physics of light passing thru glass, diffraction. Traits of lenses are slight differences from the middle to the edge. You rotate the camera around, you change the angle you are to the sun. You stitch photos together, you're putting the edge of one photo with an angle relative to the sun, with the edge of another photo with a different angle relative to the sun. You may ask it's only a slight angle, but remember that even on a single shot a picture can have darker outer edges than in the center because of diffraction. Brings you back to optic quality and why prices for lenses can be higher than others. Not saying that you don't have a good lens, but this just may be an inherent problem with stitching photos together instead of using a real panoramic. Feather a marquee outline and lighten with curves. Make it blend.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
You are talking about the darker lines in the sky aren't you?
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
That makes a lot of sense, Gregory. Chris
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Stuart U |
Gregory, I think you may have hit on it. The total angle was about 150 degrees. However, as far as lens quality, I think you can say this is about the bottom of the line. This was taken with the "Kit" lens at the shortest distance. From what I have read, this is where the lens quality suffers most. I will see what I can do with photoshop. Stuart
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
|||||||||||
