Stitching a panorama with different focal points

Tom Pinchenzo

Tom Pinchenzo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,025
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
I tried to do a panorama using horizontal images to create a vertical aspect ratio to get a wider effective focal length. There was very close objects as well as infinity so I focused differently on different shots. This created some issues where focus didn't match up (see image below, in particular, middle of the mossy rock). Is there a way of making this work out? Less overlap for instance? Or is it just an unrealistic way of going about creating this sort of image?

Cheers,
Tom

vertical pano by Tom Pinches, on Flickr
 
It's possible there was some focus breathing (where the lens zooms as you refocus) making it impossible to match the images together because individual sections were different sizes.
 
I think even without a change of zoom focal length just changing focus over a wide range will change perspective and make matching the shots difficult.
 
With this one is there a natural place that you could stitch two sets, one focussed close and one far, with the water being where you blend the two?
 
You could try PTIGui this gives you more control over the panorama stitching process by manually adjusting reference points if needed and marking areas to include and exclude from different frames. But it won’t create anything that you didn’t capture so if something is missing it needs a reshoot or maybe clone stamping in photoshop.
 
As @TimHughes suggests it would be easy enough in PTGui using masks, but that is an expensive program.

In Photoshop the stitch actually gives you masked layers representing each image. You can adjust these masks with black and white brushes in the normal way to get better seam positions.
But you need to take individual shots covering each individual significant object or segment. To ensure a reasonable coverage of the entire view. Think in terms of whole objects, or groups of objects, to focus on, rather than distances.

You can also do it in PTAssembler (a lower price program) that has Tufuse built in, it can do focus blending pretty much automatically, and with good overlaps will do a fine job.

There is nothing much wrong with your way of doing things , but because you did not have shots covering individual objects, you have ended up with seams running through them.

I do not know if you used a tripod and pan bracket, but focus fusion is a situation where using them is the far better option.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
As @TimHughes suggests it would be easy enough in PTGui using masks, but that is an expensive program.

In Photoshop the stitch actually gives you masked layers representing each image. You can adjust these masks with black and white brushes in the normal way to get better seam positions.
But you need to take individual shots covering each individual significant object or segment. To ensure a reasonable coverage of the entire view. Think in terms of whole objects, or groups of objects, to focus on, rather than distances.

You can also do it in PTAssembler (a lower price program) that has Tufuse built in, it can do focus blending pretty much automatically, and with good overlaps will do a fine job.

There is nothing much wrong with your way of doing things , but because you did not have shots covering individual objects, you have ended up with seams running through them.

I do not know if you used a tripod and pan bracket, but focus fusion is a situation where using them is the far better option.
Click to expand...
Hugin. Open source and does all the same. You only need this specialised software for 360. Photoshop can handle simple panos just fine
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Hugin. Open source and does all the same. You only need this specialised software for 360. Photoshop can handle simple panos just fine
Click to expand...
Hugin is not the most user friendly, it would cope with the stitching, I am not sure about the focus blending capabilities though.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Again. Photoshop.

How do you think I blended this one taken with 400mm lens from 6 shots? It doesn't get any more extreme https://shop.photo4me.com/1061386/framed-mounted-print?share=true
Click to expand...
Long distance pans are usually extremely easy to stitch as there are usually negligible parallax issues. At the other extreme pans of small interiors with close foregrounds can be extremely problematic. for the inexperienced. However None of this is related to the OP's problems which is one or Focus blending combined with stitching. Which needs either a dedicated software, or considerable skills with masks and layers in photoshop to achieve perfect results.
Had OP not experienced problems with this, he would not have been asking for solutions on this forum.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Long distance pans are usually extremely easy to stitch as there are usually negligible parallax issues. At the other extreme pans of small interiors with close foregrounds can be extremely problematic. for the inexperienced. However None of this is related to the OP's problems which is one or Focus blending combined with stitching. Which needs either a dedicated software, or considerable skills with masks and layers in photoshop to achieve perfect results.
Had OP not experienced problems with this, he would not have been asking for solutions on this forum.
Click to expand...
My example is nothing else but focus blending. I've done plenty so let's stop the talk of some exotic specialist software when precisely none is required
 
For what it’s worth, I had more luck more recently by the slightly longer-winded route of focus stacking each section of the pano, I.e. I did a 4 shot pano and took 3 focus stacked images for each section. Then I combined the focus stacked images. Turned out pretty well. Didn’t really have any issues with parallax despite close foreground. I have a nodal rail but I think that only works with horizontal panos. I’d need a proper nodal ninja type gimbal for verticals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top