Re: New Panoramas for critique
- Hi Mahmood,
Please be very careful with increasing saturation of a finished pano,
especially if it is only 8 bits in colourdepth! You'll get ugly
posterization (did I spell that correctly?) in clear skies and other
relatively featureless areas if you overdo it just the slightest bit!
It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope you
work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
I'll have a look at the others and PM you, OK?
- --- "erik leeman" <erik.leeman@...> wrote:
> It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope youWell, I corrected the saturation on my "almost finished" pano.
> work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
> already have.
It was 16-bit tiff, extracted from RAW though, all the way to the
- Rookie2 wrote:
>Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just
> How does the shimmering look on your computer with this panorama moving?
> Deval VR:
> Regarding the size, it got smaller than the others in the serie.
> N.S. 01: 3062 KB
> N.S. 02: 2675 KB
> N.S. 03: 2309 KB
> N.S. 04: 2154 KB
an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed
varies considerably from country to country and broadband speed is much
slower between continents. I therefore usually also compress the tiles
separately, compressing much more for the nadir unless there is something of
interest to see there. Usually my compression is: Pano2QTvr quality setting:
60 for Zenith (watch for banding in blue sky), 70 for four around and 40 for
nadir. I also sharpen on a separate layer and then mask out all the
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-Panoramas-for-critique-tf4364550.html#a12455350
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.