Different exposures with camera set to manual?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by coryammerman, Jan 2, 2010.

  1. There seems to be a lot of questions about panoramas these days, but this is less about the actual panorama technique and more about why I would get such vastly different exposures with my camera set on full manual?
    Below is a panorama shot that I threw together on a whim , thinking that I might start trying to do more of these due to the fact that I no longer have a super-wide lens after switching to DX format. I was using my new (to me) D50 with AF 50mm 1.8 D. The three images were taken with the camera set on manual, 1/125 sec at f16, no exposure compensation, ISO 200. I verified through EXIF data that the settings did not change. The shots were taken within seconds of each other. The lighting was from a very overcast sky (very diffuse light) with no wind, which I thought would be the ideal situation for maintaining exposure throughout the scene. I wasn't paying much attention at the time, but I checked to see that the shots do overlap each other by a good bit.
    The shot I'm posting involved only a half-hearted attempt at stitching the shots together (I don't have a stitching program yet) and no post processing, other than converting to jpeg by Nikon Picture Project 1.5. The NEF versions show differences in brightness also.
    The entire shot is horribly underexposed (i forgot to recalculate shutter speed after stopping down for DOF). Would this exaggerate differences in light quality?
    Metering was set to spot, but that shouldn't matter with the camera in manual mode, right?
    I'll try to post a second (properly exposed) shot taken with my 24mm, for reference.
    00VOVZ-205819584.jpg
     
  2. Reference Shot
    00VOVb-205821584.jpg
     
  3. i think spot metering contributed to the differences. try not to use spot on your second sample.
    and take note of all variables.......but hey, that was great without a stitching program. have fun.
     
  4. @Ramon - why would the metering mode make a difference - the camera was set to manual.
    According to the EXIF - Auto White Balance was on - and the images show differences in color cast. The underexposure by almost two stops doesn't help much either.
     
  5. Was AEB turned on by mistake? Metering mode shouldn't make a difference in this situation. BTW, the second photo still looks underexposed on my screen.
     
  6. This happens to me all the time with my D50. I've learned to ignore it, especially since I never go panoramas or things that require more than one frame.
     
  7. I suspect there is some exposure correction applied during the conversion process. This correction is usually based on the entire image. In addition, Photoshop (or other stitching program) may make exposure corrections. A dedicated stitching program like PTGui tries to even out variations, whereas ACR and Photoshop try to optimize each image individually.
     
  8. Did you have a polarizer on the lens?
     
  9. I don't know if this helps, but I'll post a stitch of a couple of screen caps i made from Picture Project. I don't have a program yet that allows me to stitch NEF files. Hopefully this will adequately show the difference in brightness between the NEF files (note the differences in the water).
    AEB was not on. Never use it. The only filter on the lens was a L37c UV filter.
    I'm beginning to lean towards the auto white balance brought up by Dieter as balance being the difference maker.
    00VOaU-205869584.jpg
     
  10. dieter,
    maybe it's just my practice of not using spot metering when i intend to stitch that prompted me to share the concern to cory. of course there are other variables to look into and i am for sure not an expert.
     
  11. Is the ISO auto setting on ? What are the ISO settings of the pictures in question. On my camera (Nikon D50) I think the ISO is adjusted even in manual mode if set to ISO auto.
     
  12. What did you spot meter on ? I assume you metered for the first shot and then ignored the meter reading after that.
    Any exposure compensation set by mistake ?
     
  13. Auto ISO will still work with the camera in manual mode though you would probably see the different ISOs in the exif. Did you process the NEFs at exactly the same settings?
     
  14. Were you setting the aperture via the camera body, or via the aperture ring on the lens? Note that setting via the camera body can sometimes result in some inconsistency, not normally noticeable, but in critical applications like time lapse photography or stitching, it can become significant. See this thread:
    http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00JpSP
     
  15. Your D50 captures the light that is there. Your eyesight can correct for a variety of bright and dark areas, making the average just right. The clouds (even though not in sunlight) are not evenly illuminated (for lack of a better comparison,) so the D50 recorded the light to the camera sensor in a (to you) uneven fashion. You could try to bracket your exposures and see if the results are more to your liking.
     
  16. I did some paroramas with my D200 on full manual including WB and ISO, and the exprosures were very consistant. I did use spot metering, but I only used manual lens (such as 28mm f2 AI) though. I did not know D50 but I would try a full "full manual" if I were you (say, manual WB, set the aperture on the lens as suggested above).
     
  17. I done some pano on my D70 and they were constant. If you had any diff exposures it would be at the end of one other end but the gradation from left to right was smooth.....
    I say put everything in manual, exposure, WB, focus.
    IMO that is too much from what I am seeing.
    Do you have a stuck aperture arm? I had to repair mine.
    Easy test is just take rapid frames of the same subject and see if you get the diff exposures. You can also test it by looking at the lens, choose f/2.8 or something and keep pressing the dof button repeatedly ... if failure you will see the lens closing all the way down.
     
  18. Ok, I'll try to answer most of these questions, but it's getting late and I have to work early tomorrow. The ISO didn't change between exposures, I verified this through EXIF data. If i remember correctly, I metered on the sky and opened up two or three stops. then I stopped down for DOF and forgot to change the shutter speed (hence the underexposure). I don't think there is a problem with the aperture arm, it moves smoothly when i move it by hand and i havent noticed any problems with my N75 when i press the DOF preview button at f22. I set the aperture on the lens at f22 (the minimum) and use the camera to control the aperture per the manual's instructions. Also I verified that there was no exposure compensation set.
    Thank you to everyone for all your posts. It's time for bed now. I'll check back tomorrow after i get home from work.
     
  19. It was auto something.
    The terrific underexposure may be contributing somehow since the sky is the dominant feature left.
    Noise reduction turned off? White balance put on cloudy or daylight?
    Try it again after doing a proper metering, which can be done by chimping a test shot and looking at the histogram. Then, make sure everything is turned off or put to a manual setting.
     
  20. If all settings were manual with auto iso off and auto WB off there should be no such effect in RAW images if these were shot in rapid sequence to exclude changes in light.
    Check your EXIF data if all images were shot with the same exposure time and aperture as well as WB.
    If you still see the effect (I bet 100:1 that this is not the case if all is set properly) then try to reset the camera - it indicates a "hidden pilot error".
    If RAW images were converted and the effect all the sudden appears in the converted images then there is some "auto" setting in the image conversion.
    @Edward - my PS version CS4 does not try any "optimization" of individual images when I do automatic stitching :) On the contrary it will try to reduce edge effects between images. ACR should not be considered in the context of stitching. It is easiest to find a cure if one looks at the images that enter the stitching process :)
    First find out if the problem occurs "upstream" of the stitching.
     
  21. To do panoramas-
    for panoramas- -use tripod. you must keep it level with the horizon. if your tripod does not have a level builtin then buy one that slides into your flash hotshoe. again make a max effort to get the camera level.
    -for exposure. set the exposure by pressing halfway and noting the fstop and shutter speed. you are trying to find the brightest part of you panorama scene to be. once you have found the brightest check the fstop and shutter speed. put camera into manual metering mode and use those settings. do not change them for any part of the panorama.
    -lens selection. i shoot mine with a 20mm. note: SHOOT THE LENS VERTICALLY. this is the only way to get some vertical scene, otherwise the panorama will be shaped like a hotdog. Note- if the panorama is a vertical panorama then you shoot landscape. this is why i went to a 20mm. in vertical you are cutting your angle of view way down. my tripod has degrees engraved in the mount, i was shooting at only a 15 degree spread and in looking at the shots before stitching there wasn't that much overlap. i later shot panoramas with 35mm 50mm 70mm; the hot dog effect was more pronounced. the panorama itself did work. With higher mm lens you would have to go to double rows.
    -determine in advance the center point of the scene and try to go X number of shots on each side of it. for me with my setup a 120 degree scene is 7 shots; the center and 3 on each side. if i go with a 35mm lens then a 120degree scene will take 13 shots. no matter what lens you use realize that you are adding only 33% new scene with every shot, the rest is overlap for the right and left adjoining shots. the only exceptions are the end shots in the whole scene. it is possible to add another row above and/or below the first one. this would help the vertical look especially if you are using a 50mm or longer. for multiple rows are the same as 1 row, but you know have to overlap on the vertical as well as the horizontal. you must make sure that there are no gaps.
    - i stick my hand in front of the lens and shoot, then shoot the panorama, the 7 shots, then put hand in front of lens and shoot. later i know that everything between hands is the panorama.
    -i have used cs2 or the panorama factory software to make the panorama. for either couldn't be simpler simply select the shots and it does the work. this is where using a level pays off. the software is leveling the scene to make the long rectangle, but if the scene was not as level as possible in the first place the vertical becomes less and less(you end up with hotdog shape). so having the tripod and camera level is very important. also when mount and shooting vertically make sure the camera really is vertical, carefully check by looking threw the viewfinder. some tripod vertical adjustments actually go past true vertical, mine does even though it says 90 degrees.
    -be sure to use a cable release or the selftimer.
    -on focusing- what i do is to simply preset the 20mm lems at infinity, because of depth of field everything from 5.64ft to infinity is in focus at f11.0 distance 200ft. you can also use a hyperfocal focus setup. but thanks to the DOF table, just setting the lens at infinity is simpler. -i left WB alone, that is set at AWB; or you can use a preset setting like sunny or cloudy, but once set do not change it till panorama shots are done.
    -online depth of field calculator available here- http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
    -parallax error. It is usually not so much a problem outdoor shooting. This is because the distances are greater than inside. In any event if you shoot panoramas outside and at short distances OR any inside any building, you should be thinking of getting a panorama tripod head. This is to eliminate parallax error. I have the panosaurus pano head, cheap durable, and it works.
    -for panoramas, the software i use is either panorama factory orPTGui or cs2. the one that works best for me is PTGui. i have since gotton PTGuiPRO, expensive but worth it. has many features and abilities that the other software does not have, including the ability to process 360 and 720degree spherical panoramas, plus many projection types and it does raw and hdr panos.
    -on post shooting work. If jpeg DO NOT PP. just use as is. After the pano is made then pp as desired. If raw, does your panorama software do raws? Not all do. If yes raw batch convert only. Do not adjust any 1 shot. All shots must be the same before the pano is made, then do any pp you wish but on the whole pano.
    If any pp work is done to the pano before stitching then there will be a difference in the sections, and you could(probably?) get vertical bands where the sections join.
    Any questions, please ask. gary
     
  22. Do you have a post processing program that allows you to manually set white balance? If so, run it through that and see if the problem is the same.
    I don't know why people are mentioning metering when you say that all shots were taken in manual mode with the same settings...
     
  23. A free good stitching option that helps evening out the differences in white balance and exposure (up to a point): Microsoft ICE.
    Maybe worth to give that a try (since all the other programs mentioned by others cost money), and I think you'll find that in the end doing it manually is a lot of work and extremely tricky to get completely right. If you're running a Windows PC, this program is certainly worth the try.
     
  24. It may be your shutter failing? How many pictures you've taken with this camera?
     
  25. My guess is the reasons for the variations could be as follows: 1) not manually setting white balance 2) NEF to JPEG converter is not consistent.
    Cory...if you are serious about doing panoramas, I would suggest using PTGUI. I believe they have a free 30-day trial. It will blend minor color differences very well for you. It's a great program.
     
  26. From failing shutter to (almost) little green men being the cause of his problem. Guys !
    You are spot metering, why ? On which 'spot' are you metering off ? This is a wide scene with predominantly sky. You are spot metering off a small spot on one of the totally non consisitant clouds. Your entire scene is given an illumination value of that one spot on the cloud. And yes, there will be exposure value difference between scenes, especially in a wide angle scene. Put it on centre weighted or matrix metering, put it on Auto Exp to compensate in exposure difference between the scenes and try again.
     
  27. Andrew, the OP indicated he metered, set the exposure in manual mode and did not change it. Spot metering should have little to no effect unless he re-metered each scene. Without seeing the EXIF data from each image, we may never know what the root cause.
     
  28. Douglas, spot metering has a lot to do with it. He is taking an exposure reading from a circle approximately 4mm in diameter or only 1.5% of the frame area, and then exposing the whole scene based on the reading of that 1.5% area, that 'spot' reading being in all likelyness the murky patchy sky. Spot metering is only for exposing for a specific area or spot, hence why its called 'spot metering' . The fact that he set the exposure in manual mode is irrellevent because he still set the exposure in manual mode according to the reading of the spot meter. Spot metering is the wrong method in his example of photo subject.
     
  29. Also I checked the EXIF's of three frames of a panorama I did a few days ago, and there is a one stop aperture difference from left frame to the right frame. Setting a fixed manual exposure on the left hand frame will result in a wrong exposure by the right hand frame.
     
  30. Andrew there seems some confusion.
    The way I assume that manual exposure is defined is that you set the exposure by hand - period.
    If your definition is different please let us know. Your example indicated that you use a different definitions. Of course in principle everybody can use his own definition, but only if we agree on the very simplest terms, we have a chance to decrease the obvious confusion.
    If the manual exposure settings (by my definition) were not changed from frame to frame then by definition both aperture and exposure time are the same - independent on why on earth anybody choose these settings. In this case there should be no such pronounced effect as we see in the example. This can be checked by looking at the Exif data of each individual RAW image frame.
    Obviously something interfered with this.
    Either there is a technical malfunction of the camera or there is a pilot error.
    Pilot error could be the activation of a camera function that "overrules" the "manual" setting (by above definition) e.g. auto ISO or auto WB could have such an effect - or it could have occurred in post processing.
    Let us try not to confuse this thread even more.
     
  31. Metering mode does not cause 3 seperate frames shot in manual mode and metered only once to have 3 different exposures.
     
  32. Walter, my definition of 'manual exposure', is, adjusting shutter speed manually and adjusting aperture manually until you zero your meter so that you know what shutter speed and aperture you are using at any given time. If light conditions change nothing changes on your camera until you manually and physically change aperture or shutter speed according to the light indication given by your meter. This is my definition of manual exposure. "by hand - period" - what does that mean ?
    Stuart, there seem to be two issues here, the overall underexposure of the entire scene, and the different exposure between the three shots. I'll say it again, the overall underexposure is probably caused by the spot metering method which is wrong for this scene, he needs and average exposure not a spot exposure. What spot, WHERE, did he expose for, he doesn't say ???? a spot on the the sky, a spot on the the tree on the left, what ?? ... and secondly in a wide angle scene like that by taking three separate frames, the light could be different from the left shot to the right shot. If he was manual metering , then he should have tried taking a exposure reading for each of the three frames. As I said, I've checked on panoramas I've done, I use shutter priority and let the aperture adjust automatically, that there is at least a one aperture stop difference between the left to the right hand shot.
     
  33. it's funny, andrew that you and i are the only two here that show concern and question the use of spot metering in a "scene stitch". maybe we come from a different old school of photography...... i like spot metering but i still will not use it for the op's desired result......................
    of course it's always nice to read comments/suggestions. our hobby/profession is a non-stop learning adventure. a lot of fun, too.
     
  34. Andrew, Ramon, hold on. I agree spot metering would be the culprit IF one remetered each scene and adjusted teh manual exposure accordingly. That is not what I understand the OP did. My understanding is he metered one time, set exposure and took 3 over-lapping shots. If so, I would not expect the overall exposure to change that much given the scene being photographed. The OP didn't expect it either. Hence, his post.
    BTW, I am old school, too. Starting with a Yashica Electro 35.
     
  35. It's my understanding that the meter in the camera evaluates the scene and adjusts the shutter speed/f-stop the get a proper exposure, but if the camera is set on manual exposure, the meter is basically nullified due to not being able to adjust exposure. Am I not correct in this? The bottom line is that all three images were shot at 1/125 sec @ f16, ISO 200, no exposure compensation (all verified through EXIF) and I got 3 vastly different exposures. The only things that were left on Auto were white balance, and sharpening.
    Thanks for all of your responses. I'll try it again next chance I get, and make sure to turn everything off this time.
     
  36. Cory, your understanding is correct. Good luck.
     
  37. Ramon not only you two "show concern and question the use of spot metering in a "scene stitch" " I would use spot metering of different spots in the scene similar to the old fashioned zone system or the histogram to evaluate optimal exposure - but this is irrelevant in this context and this may be the reason why others did not comment :)
    Andrew I am glad we agree on the part of setting shutter speed and aperture in manual mode :)
    As Cory stated from the beginning "The bottom line is that all three images were shot at 1/125 sec @ f16, ISO 200," he did not change the exposure and I thought you were aware of his statement. I also agree with you Andrew that in high dynamic light regimes one can improve a panorama by adjusting exposure of individual shots but 1) this requires more post processing and experience and 2) it does not help to find the cause for the reported unintended differences in exposure.
    Cory good luck and let us know whether a fixed setting of WB will solve the problem. I hope there is no hardware problem with your camera.
     
  38. Cory, Douglas,......the meter is NOT nullified in manual exposure due to not being able to adjust exposure. The meter is the tool that tells you how much light is coming from the metered area. It is you, your brain, your infinate wisdom of photography, to decide what combination of aperture and shutter speed to set to allow the correct amount of that light to reach your sensor/film plane based on that reading, and in the case of auto exposure, the camera's brain decides. In your case you have metered from an itsy bitsy teeny tiny small infinidecimal minute microscopic spot the size of the central focusing point, and applied that one single itsy bitsy teeny etc.. light value to the entire ginormous super wide angle three shot scene.
    Use matrix or centre weighted, allow for one auto parameter such as aperture, and take the three frames. You will probably find when you check your three EXIFs later, that the first frame was at 1/125 at f/16 the second 1/125 at f/14 and the third at 1/125 at f/11. Besides, the cameras system is not 100% foolproof. Your brain is supposed to be more intelligent. Even in matrix or centre weighted metering your brain should say " ah ,.. lots of sky, maybe my meter will get fooled into thinking lots of light and underexpose, maybe I should compensate a little, ahh I have a digital camera and maybe I should take a couple of test exposures...." Your brain is cleverer than that of the camera, remember that.
    For the record, I also am very old school photography, over thirty years, starting with Zenit E, Pentax KX, Nikon FE, Nikon F3, Nikon F4, Nikon D700, and I understand exposure, and manual exposure quite well.
     
  39. Cory, I wonder whether it's possible that the clouds moved a bit between your exposures, putting a thicker cloud layer in front of the sun for the last one. Maybe that's not the case since you say it wasn't windy, but there does appear to have been some variation in the clouds, and it wouldn't take much. That or a camera malfunction (probably involving the camera's control of the diaphragm lever on the lens) seem like the only possibilities.
    (I don't know everything, but the whole spot metering discussion seems like a red herring.)
     
  40. For the record, I also am very old school photography, over thirty years, starting with Zenit E, Pentax KX, Nikon FE, Nikon F3, Nikon F4, Nikon D700, and I understand exposure, and manual exposure quite well.​
    As do I. I am not sure what it is you think I do not understand. You are mis-reading something that either I or someone else has said.
    Cory was photographing a scene that was pretty evenly lit on a cloudy day and made 3 overlapping images with the result that the 3 images had different exposures. The differences look to be about 1/2-1 stop. The only way this could happen is either a) the light changed or b) Cory changed exposure/a faulty camera changed exposure (shutter speed, aperture or ISO.) Take you pick. Whether he used matrix, average or spot metering is totally irrelevant. (I agree with Kent's red herring statement.)
    the meter is NOT nullified in manual exposure due to not being able to adjust exposure.​
    Who said it was? The meter still meters.
     
  41. cory a- the following is a quoet from my howto above. this is the sectiojn on metering. it is what i use and it works.
    -for exposure. set the exposure by pressing halfway and noting the fstop and shutter speed. you are trying to find the brightest part of you panorama scene to be. once you have found the brightest check the fstop and shutter speed. put camera into manual metering mode and use those settings. do not change them for any part of the panorama.
    i should add-do not use ANY EC. just put the dslr in aperture priority mode, on your tripod, and swing back and forth across the pano to be scene, use your shooting aperture. i use f8.0. just swing across the scene notimng the fastest shutter speed selected. whatever it is that section of the pano is the broghtest. the selected fstop that that shutter speed(the fastest chosen) will be the ones to use. simply switch to manual mode and use the just found out settings. this method works for me every time, and as a dside benefit there are no joints ij off exposure where the sections meet. my pano software is PTGuiPro. costs more, but it is the best.
    below is a 3 shot pano from glacier np. during pp there was zero adjustment of exposure, this is as shot.
    00VQVt-207039584.jpg
     
  42. attached is a 5 shot pano of the north rim of the grand canyon. during pp there no adjustment of exposure, this is as shot.
    00VQVv-207041584.jpg
     
  43. even in all-off-all-manual setting, yes, the meter still meters ------------- but in different spots. hence, different metering results.
    i don't think it's a red herring. more like a stripe bass :)
     
  44. CORY : "if the camera is set on manual exposure, the meter is basically nullified due to not being able to adjust exposure. Am I not correct in this? "
    DOUGLAS :
    "Cory, your understanding is correct. Good luck"
    DOUGLAS to ME :
    "Who said it was (nullified) ? The meter still meters.
    Douglas, do you read your own statements ? You are contradicting yourself. Is Ramon and me the only ones here that understand the basic photographic principle that if you expose for the sky, and spot meter, the overall photo will be not only underexposed, but very severly underexposed ? Look at Cory's reference shot, the one taken as a single exposure. From the left the clouds are dark grey, to the right they graduate to almost white. If you split that scene up into three separate meter readings I guarantee you will have three different exposures. The only red herring here is the fact that some people are trying to tell him that he has a faulty camera when its simply a case of not understanding basic fundamental exposure !
     
  45. Also, GARY, you have explained in a very round a bout way to expose for the sky, and I notice that your two examples have both nicely exposed, very uniform skies, unlike the sky in question. You fail to mention which metering method you used ????
     
  46. andrew f- correct. i am exposing for the sky OR anything else that is the brightest item in the pano to be. i am using matrix metering in aperture priority mode. what i am avoiding is blown highlights. the darker areas can fall where they may. as seen from the 2 examples above it works. i set the fstop to f8.0 then slowly sweep the pano to be left to right. the rig is already on the tripod, and my panos tend to be 120degrees in portrait mode. what i look for is the highest shutter speed the scene shows during the sweep, then switch to manual mode use f8.0 and that highest shutter speed. the result is the pano is exposed for any and all highlights OR the brightest section of the pano.
    the 2 panos shown, and i have many more, after leaving PTGuiPro need little if any exposure adjustment. it should be noted that i am a jpeger. also in PTGuiPro the exposure blend is turned on. as stated after the shoot the images go dirrectly to PTGuiPro, the pano ois made, then any pp is done. the pp is usually a very minor nature. in pse7 i use auto levels, auto contrast, shadows/highlights(the shadow section if needed), focus magic(a plugin for sharpening), and finally noise ninja. total pp time less than 1 minute. save as a tiff. note the output from PTGuiPro is set for a tiff. the biggest pano i have made is a 28shot, 2 rows of 14 each, that ended up as 262mb.
    below is the view from my mother's front porch. a 7 shot pano, 120degrees, 20mm lens, portrait mode.
    00VQsQ-207283684.jpg
     
  47. below is the ausable river in northern michigan. this is a 3 shot pano using the 12 setting of a 12-24 zoom, portrait mode. the shape is almost the same as a unpano shot except the resolution is much higher.
    00VQsa-207285584.jpg
     
  48. Andrew, I am sorry if I have confused you. My statements you so kindly highlighted are not contradictory, unless one takes them out of context. Cory asked if the meter was "basically nullified" and I said yes. Of course the meter still meters, but in manual mode nothing is adjusted. I thought that was what Cory was asking. If not, my apologies. I never said the meter was nullified. I said it was "basically" nullified in that the changed meter reading does cause the camera to adjust aperture or shutter speed or ISO when the camera is set to manual mode.
    Something changed between the 3 images in Cory's first post. Since he implied he did not change Shutter speed or aperture or ISO, then either the light in the scene changed or something changed in the camera, perhaps due the Auto WB as has been previously suggested.
    The metering used should not make a difference as to the 3 differing photos of Cory's. Baring camera malfunction, auto WB or change in actual amount of light, I would expect the same overall exposure for a scene such as Cory's.
     
  49. Thank you Gary. MATRIX METERING. Five or seven exposure zone calculation, averages out the scene. Technically, you are not exposing just for the sky, but it is taking the rest of the metered scene into the calculation. Nice panos by the way. It is definately not the same as spot metering from a point on the sky or a bright reflection off the water.
    Just to illustrate a point about how dramatically the sky can influence the scene, especialy when it becomes the predominant feature, and is not taken into account, I am posting this four exposure sequence I took over Xmas. As I am flying alongside this airplane and the ground and runway are the dominant feature the exposure is correct, with a slightly bright sky. But watch what happens as the airplane peels upwards and the sky progressively becomes the dominant feature in the scene. The ground becomes darker and darker from being underexposed because the meter is now exposing soley for the sky. I was centre weighted metering, on shutter priority. The left frame began at 1/160 sec f/7.1, then second frame became f/11, f/14, lastly f/16. Three stops difference just because the sky was fooling my meter into thinking it was becoming a progresively brighter scene and causing it to close the aperture more.
    [​IMG]
     
  50. Gary stated -
    i am using matrix metering in aperture priority mode. what i am avoiding is blown highlights. the darker areas can fall where they may. as seen from the 2 examples above it works. i set the fstop to f8.0 then slowly sweep the pano to be left to right. the rig is already on the tripod, and my panos tend to be 120degrees in portrait mode. what i look for is the highest shutter speed the scene shows during the sweep, then switch to manual mode use f8.0 and that highest shutter speed. the result is the pano is exposed for any and all highlights OR the brightest section of the pano.​
    Gary, do I understand correctly that you set the camera mode to aperture priority @ f8, sweep the 120 degree scene to determine the highest shutter speed registered and then switch to manual exposure mode with an aperture of f8 and the shutter speed set to the highest one registered during your sweep (e.g., 1/2000)? Then, for the image of your mother's pond you would have taken 7 shots with the camera set to manual exposure mode, f8@1/2000? This would be different than what Andrew did in his 4 shot sequence of the plane, where he used shutter priority with the result that the camera settings changed for each shot. Am I understanding this correctly?
    TIA for clarifying my understanding.
     
  51. just checked the 7 shot originals of the pond. there were all taken at iso 200, 1/500, f8.0. 20mm lens, portrait position. metering method is use matrix, alrready on the tripod with cable release, fstop set to f8.0, i sweep left to right, which is how i shoot the pano. engage metering by pushing thr sbutter biutton on the cable release halfway then sweep the pano to be. keep eye on inviewfinder shutter speed info, notimnt the fastest shutter speed selected. switch to manual mode enter the f8.0 and THAT fastest shutter speed just observed.
    douglas lee did not make a pano. he shot a 4 shot sequence of a single scene. this is NOT A PANO. he did not put them together to make a single image, the pano. and i cannot see why the plane 4 shot group would go toegther to ever make a pano. i am not talking about theoretical shooting in some mode or other to experimentally get some some shots. i am talking about a real world way of making a pano that looks good and can be wall mounted, many of mine are wall mounted in my home and several others that i have given them to. this method is a how to that works. see the above examples. further in terms of seams beteween the sections, there are not any. the method works. i invite anyone to use it, if you wish to get workable and extremely usabe panos.
    during augiust, i went west on a driving vacation to see national parks. of thr shots taken i took some panos, at glacier national pk yellowstone np grand canyon northa nd south rim meteor crater and views of the paninted desert in peterfied forest np. all worked as shot, there were no messed up shots or panos in any way. the method works and works every time. i took 1 pano of each scene and everyone came out fine.
    below is a another 3 shot pano of the grand canyon.
    00VRaY-207703584.jpg
     
  52. 4 shot pano of meteor crater.
    00VRab-207705584.jpg
     
  53. 3 shot pano of the painted desert. temp was about 105 when the shots were taken.
    00VRah-207705684.jpg
     
  54. again another view of the painted desert.
    agin i emphasize that these pano shots were one of, that is no double or triple retakes were done. i took a single pano at each location/view and the my pano method worked every time. since the trip was 6450 miles and 3 weeks going back for retakes was extremely impractical and unlikely.
    00VRap-207705984.jpg
     
  55. Gary, thank you for the re-explanation of your technique. I have not attempted any panos as yet. I do want to try sometime and just wanted to make sure I understood your technique. That is how I would expect it to work. Taking a new meter reading of each scene and setting the camera accordingly could result in 7 different exposures which would have to be fixed in post. To much work for me. I do like the images you have posted. Well done!
    BTW, it was Andrew that posted the 4 shot sequence of the plane. Not me. I understand that is not a pano. I believe Andrew was attempting to show how the camera's meter changes as the scene changes.
     
  56. below is a 5 shot pano of the yellowstone np. pano taken near old fathfull on the boardwalks. if viewed large enough the site of old faithfull yellowstone inn and the bulding complex there are visable. taking this pano, i broke my own rule an took it in landscape mode to get all in, the result is about a 220degree pano, more then half a circle. on the right can you see all the people against the trees? they are very tiny, but clearly there on a monitor. it is very hard to describe how much real estate/scene this pano is actually showing. if the boardwalk on the right by the trees is followed then 8.4 miles on you will arrive at the morning glory pool. 30yrs ago, on another trip to yellowstone i did walk that.
    00VRb3-207707584.jpg
     
  57. douglas lee- sorry about you and the plane.
    i use a pano head for my panos. if you have any near items in the scene, say within 20-30ft of the dslr and then the general scene then the pano head is advised to stop parallax. but if you can keep the scene only showing the far object then you can just use a regular head. if you shoot an indoor scene, then a pano head is mandatory since you will have parallax problems. my regular head is a bogen pan/tilt. imuse the panosaurus haed for my panos, cheap and it works. try google.note some of the panos trip shot were handheld some used the pano head. i handheld if i had a clear horizon to follow in the viewfinder. the grand canyon panos were with the pano head. i say follow the horizon, does not mean right in the middle. my dslr happens to have other marks and i used one of those.
    by the way. the yellowstone pano was 9210x2597 pixels. that is equal to a 23.9 mp dslr or FF. below is a 28shot, 14 in each of rows, pano of the straits of mackinaw in michigan. the straights are 5 miles wide, and so is the bridge. the bridge towers are as high as the washington monument in dc. image taken 0308. it was taken with a 70mm lens. it is 14231x3839 pixels or the equiv of 54.6 mp dslr. the full sized tiff is 262mb.
    00VRbl-207715584.jpg
     
  58. Douglas thanks for explaining what i was trying to illustrate, and that it was not a pano. I thought that was obvious.
    Incidentally, on the subject of Auto exposure changing the camera settings in my 4 shot sequence, assuming in that rapid fire situation I actually had the time to manual expose each frame, thay would still the same because i would be setting manually the settings based on the same light meter readout. Get it ? If I exposed manualy for the right hand frame, and caried that same exposure through to the left, the shots would become more and more underexposed.
    Gary's panos are perfectly exposed. They feature a uniformly lit sky from one end to the other, perfectly proportioned sky to land percentage from one end to the other, and uses Matrix Metering which takes in to account sky and ground luminocity. Nothing in common with Cory's original underexposed pano, with a graduated sky that gets lighter from left to right, water that gets lighter from left to right and becomes almost a total glare. And, despite all the discussion about his spot metering Cory has still not told us where exactly he spot metering from. Incase anyone still has any doubts about the effect of the various metering methods and their effect on the picture, here is the explanation from "The Digital SLR handbook" by Micheal Freeman ( not the Micheal Freeman who posts on these forums apparently) . Post come up a few minutes as it wasn't readable.
     
  59. Ok, here it is. Two separates as thats the only way to read in detail.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  60. just a thought to cory- either the dslr is faulty or the method is. isf cory can take a normally exposed image of a scenew then it is not the dslr. but, even the single shot of the bridge shows underexposure. other than methos, i am still wondering if the EC is turned on in some way. or any other feature on the dslr that would do a similar job. since he made a 3 shot pano, and the seams between the section are so obvious this shows that the exposure was not the same. if me the first thing i would do is check ALL THE DSLR SETTINGS to ensure that they are at the default. i am speaking of the expoure and metering items. do not assume check one at a time. forget spot metering. then use the method in the howto that i have written above and see if that works.
     
  61. Andrew, I stated in one of my previous post that I metered on the sky and then adjusted the given values. After figuring the exposure for the rest of the scene (using the Zone system) I then stopped down to increase DOF and then forgot to adjust shutter speed to compensate, giving the obvious underexposure.
    My qusetion to you is, If the camera cannot adjust shutter speed and f-stop in manual mode, how does the meter affect exposure? As I said before, it was my understanding that the meter was unable to adjust exposure in manual mode. I'm not trying to be contrary, just trying to get an understanding. If I am incorrect please explain to me how the meter can adjust exposure if not with either shutter speed or f-stop.
     
  62. cory-my strong suggestion is to forget spot metering the sky(this explains to me how you got differing exposures, the differing sections of the sky had different brightness thus different exposures), forget zone system. simply folow the method i have outlined above and use it. as you can see from the panos i have provided above the system works and works very well. simply put you are making the job too complicated for what you are trying to do. and that is take a panorama.
    to repeat, put dslr into aperture priority mode, set to shooting aperture(f8.0-f11.0), turn meter on, then sweep the pano to be using matrix or evalutive metering whatever your dslr has. noting the fastest shutter speed selected. {make sure you are sweeping the pano to be just the way you will shoot it, and not tilting up for sky on down for ground}. switch to manual mode use that shooting aperture, and the fastest shutter speed that was observed and selected by the meter. and speaking of meter, pay no attention to it in manual mode; you just did the metering in aperture priority mode. staring from the left, and using a 33% overlap shoot your pano using as many exposures as it takes to cover your pano in portrait mode. if making a mutirow pano, also use a 33% vertical overlap. MAKE NO ADJUSTMENTS WHATSOEVER TO THE EXPOSURE DURING THE SHOOT. your shots will all have the exact same exposure.
    when the shooting is done, if shooting joeg, I do, make no adjustments in pp just put the shots in your pano software. if shooting raw convert to the as shot settings, make no pp adjustrnents just put in your pano software. for pano software i strongly suggest and recommend PTGuiPro. it is simply the best. and does a super great job of blending the seams between the sections including exposure, (see above panos from me all were done with PTGuiPro). i have used several pano software, i think 6 others, all were either inferior or simply did not have the abilities of the PTGuiPro. the PTGuiPro can use raw directly and make 360 and 720 degree panos. a 720 degree pano is really a QTVR which i have also done. you cannot show these on the web since they will not transfer to the on screen website i use, photobucket.com and still be a QTVR. plus many other abilities. when the pano is made and make in the largest pixel dimensions you can, THEN PP THE WHOLE PANO AS A UNIT. the 28shot, 2 rows of 14 shots each, frozen bridge pano above was about a 850mb group of pics. this was made into a 262mb pano as a tiff. even as a jpeg for webprinting it became a 19mb jpeg. it is currently hanging on my frontroom wall and looks great.
     
  63. gary,
    that was a great refresher lesson for me and i hope for all of us interested in doing panoramas. thanks a million.
    have fun, cory. thank you also for starting with a very interesting post.
     
  64. So, I was going to ignore this thread, but...
    Gary, I understand everything you have said (and agree with you), except the recent statement that you believe Cory's problem is the result of the use of spot metering. And, i fully understand how the different metering options work. It appears, and I may be wrong, that you and Andrew are assuming Gary is adjusting exposure for each shot, unlike you. Cory has stated he did NOT adjust exposure between each shot. Therein lies the reason for Cory's question regarding three different exposures for what appears to be an evenly lit scene. At least my experience is that the lighting on an overcast day is very even.
    Using Cory's original subject, let's assume he spot metered on the bridge itself and set his exposure accordingly (in manual mode). I would assume the result would be a generally overexposed image because he metered on something that was darker than a medium gray. I would also expect all three of his images to be equally over-exposed. Or, how about this. Assume Cory had been using matrix metering, got his meter reading, let's assume 1/2000@f8, and then switched to manual mode and set his exposure for 1/2000@f8. Then, upon further reflection decided he preferred an aperture of f22 and changed his aperture to f22, but failed to adjsut his shutter speed accordingly. (Sound familiar?) Now he takes his three images but they are all 3-stops under-exposed. The point being they are ALL 3 stops underexposed. In Cory's case the images are underexposed, but by different amounts. As I stated previously, either the light was changing or the camera was programmed wrong or faulty.
    The choice of metering has no bearing in why there are three images with different exposures, when Cory stated he did not change aperture or shutter speed between exposures.
     
  65. douglas l-i am assuming the following: that he metered with spot the sky above each of his 3 sections, used some kind of zone system(he mentions this), then uses that unadjusted exposure setting for each of the shots. he would get 3 diffferent exposures, very probably darker(since the metering was off the sky, and then shoot. the result would be what he got: a dark image of 3 different exposures.
    the problem that i have is his single shot of the scene which is also too dark. that single should be brighter. hence my suggestion that each of the dslr's settings that it uses for exposure be rechecked to see if any are not where they should be. that is to be able to take a single shot of any scene and have it exposed right. i would dearly like him to go out into his backyard or street and simply shoot a matrix/evalutive metered scene. never mind the zone sysatem or manual or anything else. just shoot that scene in auto or program with no adjustments of any kind and put into this thread. if it is ok exposed then that would prove the dslr is working correctly. from what i have read by him i sam getting the growing feeling that he adjusting the meter's settings in some way thus skewing the exposure. hence my strong desire for a auto or program shot with ZERO adjustments of any kind.
     
  66. Gary, given your assumptions, I would agree with your conclusions. However, I would point out that what Cory said in his initial post was as follows --
    The three images were taken with the camera set on manual, 1/125 sec at f16, no exposure compensation, ISO 200. I verified through EXIF data that the settings did not change. The shots were taken within seconds of each other. The lighting was from a very overcast sky (very diffuse light) with no wind, which I thought would be the ideal situation for maintaining exposure throughout the scene. I wasn't paying much attention at the time, but I checked to see that the shots do overlap each other by a good bit.​
    I interpret Cory's statement to be in conflict with your assumptions. Regardless, I appreciate your sharing your technique. I learned something and that is always a good thing!
    -Doug
     
  67. Gary, I would also like to thank you for sharing your technique. I have taken notes from them and I plan on attempting another pano tomorrow. I have not had time to get out and shoot due to being a fulltime student and working part time to try an pay the bills. Tomorrow is the first day off I've had since my origional post! I will post my results. I still don't have a pano program. Does the PTGui program you mentioned offer a free trial version?
    In reference to my original post, I did not meter or adjust exposure between shots. I have checked this twice. That is why I was surprised to get different exposures. The second image I posted was intentionally underexposed to maintain detail in the sky. I routinely do this on cloudy days to keep the sky from turning into a flat gray blob. I try to keep it at about a half-stop underexposure and then adjust brightness/contrast in PP, which i didn't do for this shot since it was just for reference. In hindsight, I probably should have.
    Again, thanks for your posts. I sincerely appreciate your efforts in teaching me how to do panos.
    Cory
     
  68. cory-see this website.
    http://www.ptgui.com/
    is there any way you can post your 3 shots used in the bridge pano?
     
  69. Sure. I'll have to crank up my other (slow) computer where those shots are. I just got my laptop back from the repair shop.
     
  70. First shot
    00VSUW-208197584.JPG
     
  71. second shot
    00VSUb-208197784.JPG
     
  72. third shot
    00VSUe-208199584.JPG
     
  73. Yes indeed Cory, you did mention that it was metered from the sky, sorry. Its got to the point where you can't see the wood for all the trees. Slightly also kicking myself for not realising what you said waaaay back, about stopping down for depth of field but leaving a high (underexposing) shutter speed. OF COURSE its all going to be grossly underexposed, then why did we spend a week or so trying to explain why you generally are underexposed ?? I thought you meant you just forgot to note down what shutter speed you used, grrrr. Maybe you should have posted your original question when you had at least made a correct first frame exposure and the other frames had varying exposures, not when you knowingly had wrong shutter speeds, which makes it a wild goose chase.
    Now to the fact of the slight variations , Douglas, again, I know he didn't adjust exposure for each frame, but the one single exposure reading he wrongly took ( because of spot metering, because of knowlingly using wrong shutter speed), he carried on to the other frames which DO NOT HAVE UNIFORM LIGHT AS FAR AS SPOT METERING IS CONCERNED. If you still cannot understand this, I cannot say anything further. I'm signing off on this discussion with the following picture :
    [​IMG]
     
  74. Curiouser and curiouser! I like puzzles, and this is an interesting one and a learning experience.
    Using the three original images Cory kindly supplied, I tried a few different things. The first thing I tried was just lining them up as well as possible by hand as Cory did originally. I started with the left one, then added the middle one as a layer on the top of the stack, and finally added the right image as the topmost layer. So the order of the layers, from top to bottom, was: right, middle, left. Here's the result. It's very similar to Cory's original post.
    00VSaC-208247684.jpg
     
  75. Then I tried reversing the layers' order, this time making the left image the top layer and the right image the bottom one. Surprisingly (to me anyway) this made the exposures match pretty well, though the image does gradually darken from left to right, which may be an accurate portrayal of the actual scene (note the lighter clouds on the left and darker ones on right).
    00VSaG-208249684.jpg
     
  76. Finally, I used CS4 to merge the three images into a panorama. This was the result.
    00VSaI-208251784.jpg
     
  77. I've stared at the two hand-assembled versions for quite a while trying to understand why the order makes a difference but am stumped. Maybe someone else can explain it.
    (Thanks to Gary and Andrew for all the good information on panoramic techniques.)
     
  78. Interesting indeed! Kent, your final image is what I would have expected.
    Andrew, again I understand how a camera's meter works. Perhaps the reason I do not understand your point is that you have not explained why spot metering, as opposed to matrix or centerweighted, would result in different exposures in the current context of Cory's image. Let's take the graphic you supplies above. I understand that, using spot metering, one will obtain a different meter reading from each of the selected areas in your example. Duh! However, once locked in the results should not vary, given an evenly lit subject. In fact, Gary's examples prove this and it is not at all related to the metering mode selected. All any metering mode does is give you the starting point for exposure.
    Instead of using any kind of meter Gary could have used the sunny f16 rule. In fact, that is kinda what he did (ISO 200, 1/125@f16) but forgot to open up 2-3 stops to allow for the overcast circumstances.
    If I am incorrect, could someone besides Andrew explain it to me or PM me. Thank you.
     
  79. Rereading my post above, it appears I am dismissing Andrew. Didn't mean to come across that way. Just that Andrew has tried and failed and I was hoping someone else may be able to explain my mis-understanding in a way that makes sense to me. Assuming I am not getting it, as Andrew has said. Thanks.
     
  80. cory- thanks for posting your 3 images. i used PTGuiPro and pse7 for making the pano. let me know what you think. note what PTGuiPro does with the 3 differering exposures. where are the section breaks now? this demontrates why i use PTGuiPro. after PTGuiPro i used pse7-autolevels, auto contrast, shadows/highloights(the shadows only), noise ninja, focus magic(for sharpening).
    see below.
    00VSdZ-208287684.jpg
     
  81. Ok, I think I have two images that demonstrate what I have been trying to unsuccessfully explain. Camera settings were manual exposure mode, spot metering, ISO 200. I intentionally pick a bright (i.e., something lighter than medium gray) spot to meter off of. I metered off of the corner of the house in the first image, which resulted in a shutter speed of 1/1250@f8. As you can see, this resulted in two equally (as best as I can determine on my screen) underexposed images. The third image is my quick attempt to combine/align the images in CS4. To my eye, the exposure is pretty even across the "pano" image, which is what I would expect. And, that is all I have been trying to say.
    Well, image uploading isn't working for me. So, I was only able to post the "pano".
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    00VSli-208379584.jpg
     
  82. I'll try it this way --
    first shot
    00VSls-208379784.jpg
     
  83. Second one --
    00VSlu-208379884.jpg
     
  84. Gary, very nice job making a good looking panorama from Cory's images. And Douglas, I understand your point and agree.
    I've thought some more about the hand-assembled versions I posted above and how they could look so different depending on the order in which the layers are stacked. In the first one (top to bottom: right, middle, left) we see two places where the left edge of one of Cory's frames is juxtaposed against the same part of the scene captured more toward the middle of the neighboring frame. In each case, the capture from the left edge of the frame is darker than the same area as captured by the middle of the neighboring frame.
    In the second hand-assembled version (top to bottom: left, middle, right), we see two places where the right edge of one of Cory's frames is juxtaposed against the same part of the scene captured toward the middle of the neighboring frame. Here, the captures from the right edge of the frame match the same area as captured by the middle of the neighboring frame pretty well. (Not perfectly, however. In each case, the image as captured at the extreme right edge of one frame is slightly darker than the same part of the scene as captured near the middle of the neighboring frame. But the darkening at the right edges shown here is much less than the darkening at the left edges shown in the first example.)
    So the only conclusion seems to be that Cory's frames are not evenly exposed left to right. In other words, there is vignetting, which is more pronounced on the left edge of each frame than on the right. I don't know what's causing it, of course, though Cory could probably do some tests and figure it out if he wants to. Some possibilities would seem to be: (1) that this is the normal behavior of a 50mm f/1.8 stopped down to f/16 (though it seems odd that it would be uneven); (2) a filter, lens shade, or other accessory (again odd that it would be uneven); (3) a camera strap or finger or something partly blocking the left side (surely not!); or (4) an issue of some kind with the D50's hybrid mechanical/electronic shutter.
     
  85. Here's a cropped version of a pano i did today. It was stitched with the trail version of the PTGui program (that's why there are watermarks). I forgot to shoot it in portrait, which is why I had to crop it to post here. To get it within the 700 pixel guideline for posting the image was too small to be able to see much. I used center-weighted metering to get the exposure and switched to manual. Again, I forgot about WB and it was set to shade (luckily not auto again), so I had to do some color correction, but the original exposure was very close to even across the scene.
    Another thing I learned today is that I have got to get a better tripod if I want to do this on a regular basis. My $30 Sunpak is not gonna be sufficient.
    Gary, thanks for all your help (and everyone else too.) I think I'll buy the full version of PTGui, but I'll have to wait a bit. No $ in the budget for it right now.
    00VSnw-208403584.jpg
     
  86. Kent -- interesting. Thanks for thinking more about this and sharing. We'll never know exactly what happened, but this has certainly been a learning experience for me and others.
    Cory -- glad you have moved forward and gotten some good results. Good luck with your future pano projects.
    -Doug
     
  87. cory-
    if/when you do get PTGuiPro. you should mske use of the editor subscreen in the progrsam. this adjusts the edges of the pano to be to givr you a true rectangle. this ewould eleimiate the top noimgae section of your psano. and is what i did to your 3 images. the original pano before adjustment had a lot of jagged edges, use of the editor removed them. also, there is a control point(these are the common points linking the different sections together) editor, and this can used to rid the pano of any points that create a large and unacceptable variation. all in all, the program has features coming out of its program ears.
    note that when you get PTGuiPro you also get access to any updates for a long time after purchase. also check out the available extras that you can download to go with the program.
    see my next reply.
     
  88. QTVR=QuickTime Virtual Reality
    i have made some QTVR for my own use and showing to my relatives and friends. On my pc. Use google for QTVR and you will get websites that have MANY MANY QTVRS to see. They can be seen using Quicktime 7.x or later.
    it is really not a problem if you happen to have the right gear. i use a 6mp dslr, the panasaurus panorama head, a tripod, cable release, and a sigma 12-24mm zoom at the 12mm setting. (i already have my lenses calibrated to be used on the nodal point. i know the numbers, just dial them in). for the QTVR i make 2 complete circles, of 12 shots each, each with the pano head tilted up 30degrees and tilted down 30degrees. except for a very small black circle at the top and bottom, it is is a 720degree spherical panorama. in the future i am thinking of getting the 8mm sigma or the 10-17pentax lens. this would eliminate the black circles. once setup the shooting takes maybe 10-15minutes.
    prior to running in the software, i batch process the images, jpegs, in pe7. i use auto level, auto contrast and auto sharpening. once in PTGuiPro they are rotated right side up as a group.
    it is then run in PTGuiPro software to make the finished result. the software runs about an hour or a little less to make the circular image, the QTVR. It is saved as a special format in a folder, and can be viewed in Quicktime 7.x or later. The quicktime 7.x or later can turn the image in a circle or move it vertically.
    note hdr QTVR are possible but then you would be shooting multiple exposures of each frame. PTGuiPro will make them. there may be other software that does, but PTGuiPro is the only one that i know that does.
     
  89. Absolutely my last post to this thread. Honest.
    00VSs0-208441584.jpg
     
  90. cory-
    "Another thing I learned today is that I have got to get a better tripod if I want to do this on a regular basis. My $30 Sunpak is not gonna be sufficient."

    the tripod that i use for my panos is a kmart job that has to be 35yrs old. it is by no means terrific. it should be noted that the longest lens i have used to make a pano is a 70mm. while the heaviest is the sigma 12-24mm zoom, used at the 12mm setting. for panos you are not using much in the way of large lenses. i do have a bogen with a pan/tilt bogen heavy duty head that i use for other purposes but not panos. the weight supported is just not that much.
    an item in the making of good high quality panos is to remember and use all the little things that make it work. if you wish copy and paste my howto above then print it as a guide. personally, i use awb on all my panos. the only exception is the indoor type and have no problem at all. the examples above were all done awb. you mentioned exposure in your last reply. please note that if you have a certain lighting situation then you will find that on one end or the other the overall brightness does/can dim. do not get exiited and think you have to adjust, it is supposed to do that. by going to manual and using the identical settings for all shots you are forcing the dslr to ignore the meter. that is the reason you sweep the scene first at shooting aperture, to determine the brightest portion and use that sspeed. the rest of the pano will fall in exposure as it may, but there will be no blown highlights. in effect you are pegging the brighest portion of the scene at the high end of the histogram then letting the rest of the scene fill the histo as it will. also the panos i have shown are horizontal panos and are normally shot in portrait mode. if you shoot a vertical pano, then you sahoot that in landscape mode.
     
  91. Douglas, of course you're right to dismiss Andrew. Once you lock the exposure, there should be no variation of the Same Point from frame to frame. Of course there will be Global variation - some part of the sky may be darker than another part of the sky. And one frame may be generally darker than the next if that part of the sky is generally darker. But the exact same point, included in two images with identical exposure, should not change brightness.
    My first thought was bracketing, then I noticed the OP's statement that exposure was the same. Then I thought maybe Auto-ISO but that was also ruled out. Polarizer also ruled out. Perhaps there was another layer of clouds above this one? That layer going in front of the sun might have made the whole scene darker... Looks like Cory's most recent pano worked fine though, so perhaps we'll never know the cause of the original problem!
     
  92. Boy, did this thread ever get off track. I still stand by what I posted almost 10 days ago - AWB (automatic white balance) is the culprit for the variation.
    Meter the entire scene with whatever metering mode you want (matrix, spot, center-weighted) - done and interpreted correctly, either will yield correct results. Do the metering in M, S, or A - don't matter one bit. Select the exposure you want to take all the shots of the pano in, turn off all auto function (auto iso, auto WB), set the exposure manually and take all the shots with the fixed exposure setting.
     
  93. i actually like how gary handled everything. he was teaching/suggesting and focused on cory's concerns in a manner that everybody else is learning something new. i'm not a pano man but i did take notes from what he said.
    and to top it all, he was very polite by indirectly saying that the proper metering mode matters when you want to get the desired result :) somewhere up there he did say "forget spot metering, zone sytem......just do this and that...."
     
  94. So, should we get this thread to 100 posts? :)
    Boy, did this thread ever get off track. I still stand by what I posted almost 10 days ago - AWB (automatic white balance) is the culprit for the variation.
    Meter the entire scene with whatever metering mode you want (matrix, spot, center-weighted) - done and interpreted correctly, either will yield correct results. Do the metering in M, S, or A - don't matter one bit. Select the exposure you want to take all the shots of the pano in, turn off all auto function (auto iso, auto WB), set the exposure manually and take all the shots with the fixed exposure setting.​
    Dieter I could not agree with you more. I'll have to take some of the blame for keeping this thread alive. For myself, I wanted to know if my understanding of exposure was somehow flawed. I found that it wasn't. And, I learned a lot about pano shots that I did not know before becoming involved with this thread.
    i actually like how gary handled everything. he was teaching/suggesting and focused on cory's concerns in a manner that everybody else is learning something new. i'm not a pano man but i did take notes from what he said.​
    Ramon, well said.
    and to top it all, he was very polite by indirectly saying that the proper metering mode matters when you want to get the desired result :) somewhere up there he did say "forget spot metering, zone sytem......just do this and that...."​
    Again with metering modes. No one has explained why/how the choice of mode can result in images of differing exposure given an even light source. (I am not saying that matrix or avg metering mode won't give you different results for the initial exposure.) And why is that? Because the choice of mode has no effect.
    Look. You can take pano images using the sunny f16 "rule". Doesn't involve a meter at all. Finally, Ansel Adams made some damn good images using the Zone System and spot metering.
    I am not assuming anyone who has contributed to this thread is stupid. Sorry if I come across that way. I just have a problem with mis-information or misunderstandings. Too many years as an accountant/auditor. :)
    -Doug
     
  95. dieter s- note that in all the panos i posted, ALL were done with awb.
    to others thank you for the compliments, well appreciated.
    i do hope cory got something out of the thread and can now take a pano with reasonable success.
     
  96. i do hope cory got something out of the thread and can now take a pano with reasonable success.​
    I am sure he will and I believe I can, too, thanks to your good advice.
     

Share This Page