Re: about stitching

[Alan Zinn <azinn@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 07:02 AM 11/6/2000 -0800, you wrote:
>
>--- Michel Dusariez <dusariez@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Stop stitching, stitching is obsolete, why  do you
>> not use panoptic cameras
>> as Lookaround, Hulcher, Roundshot or easy  to made
>> yourself Larscan
>> panoptic cameras?
>> 
>> With this type of cameras, only one stitching for
>> one complete 360 degrees
>> photograph !
>
>As to the question of the ease of stitching a 360
>degree from one individual negative or several digital
>originals there is no advantage, both require only the
>click of one button. 
>
>IMHO- If you desire a print from a negative on
>photographic paper using an enlarger or a Cirkut
>contact print then film is still the best way to go.
>If on the other hand, a digital computer file will be
>used in any way, then direct to digital from a digital
>camera is just about always the clear choice.
>
>BTW... Direct to digital has another advantage. Most
>modern stitching programs include a morphing function
>that blends differences in exposure between frames
>automatically. I am able to shoot separate images with
>my digital camera in the automatic exposure mode. I
>can easily show the outside and inside views of a
>building in one image. Modern stitching software makes
>what would be impossiable with anything but a $9,000
>Super Roundshot child's play with a sub $500 2
>megapixel digital camera. 
>
>With my Nikon Coolpix I can even choose to bracket
>exposures. This allows me to make a set of exposures
>for the inside of a room AND then a set for the views
>out the windows and doors. Using PhotoShop or
>PaintShop Pro I rubber stamp the outside views over
>the inside views through the windows and doors. Try
>doing that with a film based camera. ;-)
>
>Also, by carfully timing when I shoot the digital
>segment I can choose to make a scene full of human
>activity or completely void of people. I can even
>choose to shoot it both ways if I want to.
>
>Both of these examples were shot on a digital camera,
>in segments, hand held:
>
>Extra people sample at
>http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/cirkut8/Hill1artThumb.jpg
>(The triplets are the same girl three times)
>
>
>Empty of cars street scene example at
>http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/cirkut8/KWDuvalStThumb.jpg
>(You can see the advantage of automatic exposure in
>the detail of the area in the shade on both ends)
>
>:-)
>Bob
>


Bob,

Pan cameras can do live action in good light. As you well know digital pans
are not real-time. This could be a serious limitation. On the other hand
they are easier to manage in poor light. 

There is no reason that combining two different exposures couldn't be done
with a pan camera. 

AZ

New for November: "High and Low" b/w street pans.
Lookaround Panoramic Camera and Gallery:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Gallery/8874/
keyword.com: lookaround

Where's the camera? http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Gallery/8874/passcam.html