Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Beautiful Panoramas: Turkey Cinemascope
- Roger D. Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:02:51 +0900, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:It's the author himself that calls these "cinemascope" and I agree with
>> Beautiful Photography
>> but not panoramic photography.
> Ah, Hans. I am interested to find that someone whom I respect so much
> for the beauty of his panoramas has such a narrow definition of the
> word "panorama."
To me, "spherical panoramas" is 360°x180°
"Panoramas" is 360°x (anything), as intended by Robert Barker, the
original panorama maker
It is not the aspect ratio that counts - 1:1 aspect ratios such as
are as much panoramas to me as 1:4 aspect ratios of the four 90°HFOV
cubefaces put side by side as in
<http://www.photopla.net/060826boston/spiv1024/45c.jpg> (ignore the two
rightmost cubefaces, though even as a 1:6 aspect ratio it is a viable
anything with less than 360°HFOV is something else. I like the word
"cinescope" used by Nuri Bilge Ceylan.
> I personally call stitched panoramas "spherical panoramas."panoramas can be stitched or not (slit cameras / one shot mirrors).
Stitching is just one technique to produce panoramas.
Copyright (c) 2007 Yuval Levy
Verbatim copying and distribution on other medium than YahooGroup
- On Tue 27-Feb-2007 at 07:37 -0000, dmgalpha wrote:
>I was in London today and had a look in. The pictures are beautiful
> I envy those in London and NY City. They can experience exhibits that
> never reach our cities.
> I strongly urge those in London to visit the exhibit of Nuri Bilge
> Ceylan. His work is currently displayed at the National Theatre.
and no disappointment.
Some of them are heavily 'worked', but actually the ones I liked
most _are_ the real paste-up jobs. A few are stitched, but there
was no panotools involved, they are just carefully lined-up and
> We, as panophotographers, can certainly learn from him.The other thing to learn is that hanging a picture four feet above the
floor is just wrong.