# Panoramas - How much is too much?



## Woodwideweb (Aug 21, 2017)

Hi

I made a first serious attempt at an HDR Panorama during a recent trip, and here is the result.

For a first attempt I'm happy with the processing, but would appreciate some feedback on the composition. Is there simply too much in the image?

Thanks in advance for any feedback or advice.

Chris


----------



## Joules (Aug 21, 2017)

I think it's a really nice image, well put together. For a first attempt it's even better, I've had some trouble with my recent attempts at stitching.

I think it's a bit irritating that there are two bright points of interest on opposing sides of the image in the bridge and the river and maybe the sky's a little dark, but it's not much of a problem. You might also try to remove the metal bars in both corners with content aware fill, maybe? The lead the eye out of the frame and disturb the beautiful nature a bit.

But aside from that, it's an amazing image in my opinion. I'd love to get similar results!


----------



## Woodwideweb (Aug 21, 2017)

Hi Joules

Thanks for the complements and the comments

[quote author=Joules
I think it's a bit irritating that there are two bright points of interest on opposing sides of the image in the bridge and the river
[/quote]

I think you could be right, and that's probably what I couldn't quite see when I looked at the image. I might try cropping to create two images.

Chris


----------



## leGreve (Aug 21, 2017)

Agree... would be much stronger as two seperate images, since right now left and right are combatting eachother for attention.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 21, 2017)

I think the quality of the image looks excellent but I agree with the competing halves. 

I have attached a cropped version for comparison - it is still 'wider than average' but not as much as you had hoped.


----------



## danski0224 (Aug 21, 2017)

Woodwideweb said:


> Hi
> 
> I made a first serious attempt at an HDR Panorama during a recent trip, and here is the result.
> 
> ...



Looks OK to me.

The bright points make sense because those areas are not in shadow. It's darker in the middle because that's where the shadow is. Making it all uniform or more uniform would take away from the image.

I don't care for the fencing in the bottom corners either, but it may not be possible to eliminate them.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 21, 2017)

Woodwideweb said:


> Hi
> 
> I made a first serious attempt at an HDR Panorama during a recent trip, and here is the result.
> 
> ...



I think it's a good image, and rather unusual, which is a good thing. Perhaps the right hand side could be brighter, as the HDR processing makes the contrast quite low in that part. Pity about the railing, but that's probably unavoidable, and these are mere quibbles. Keep up the good work!


----------



## ethanz (Aug 22, 2017)

I think the perspective may be a bit off. Like the middle should have more space to it, so that both the left and right are a little further apart. With it being wider then, the balance may be better so the two areas of interest spoken about above aren't right next to each other. Otherwise it is a nice and interesting shot. Good scene with the lighting.


----------



## Woodwideweb (Aug 22, 2017)

Many thanks to everyone who took the time to reply and comment, and thank you for the positive comments, suggestions and encouragement.

Mikehit - the crop you suggested was exactly what I had in mind.

I'll have a go at removing the railings, but think it will be difficult without leaving an obvious sign that cloning has taken place - but I guess it's all good practice. As usual, it wasn't possible for me to capture the view from that angle without the railings - at least not without the power of flight!

It's funny how you can look at one of your own images, and know that 'something isn't quite right', but can't see it until someone else points it out to you 

I think that I got a bit over-enthusiastic with the location, and attempted to capture it in a single image, but at least I have a nice large file which can be cropped (always more to learn).

Ultimately I was surprised at how easy the software makes it to create such an image.

Thanks again

Chris


----------



## benique (Aug 22, 2017)

I think you could improve it even more by taking two shots for each part. One would be 1/500s or something like that for a sharp flaura and one maybe 3s for the water.


----------



## Woodwideweb (Aug 22, 2017)

Hi benique

Very good point. I was so focussed on getting a good shutter speed for the water I didn't consider a high speed to ensure that the trees etc. were as sharp as possible (something to think about next time).

I would expect that sharper images could be more difficult for the software to stitch cleanly (especially if it's windy) but don't have any experience to support that. I don't recall it being particularly windy that morning.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 22, 2017)

I like it. I like that it is too much and has competing areas. Sometimes breaking the rules works. I agree that there is something about the perspective that is off. It gives it an otherworldly quality, like you're in Middle Earth or something, a fantasy world perhaps. Maybe that's what it felt like to be there. I think that is one thing to aim for in a picture, conveying the experience. It would work even better printed out as a mural and viewed from some distance, rather than as a small portion of a screen that I'm sitting 18" away from. In murals, more than one focal spot works well.

And, yes, I agree that it can be cropped to make nice, realistic pictures. It depends upon what you want to do. It is an artistic decision.

Back in March I was on my way to the Andy Warhol Museum and passed this park in Pittsburgh. I took several shots and stitched them together. I had to fiddle with the perspective, but the end result looks the way I remember seeing it when I was there.


----------



## Vern (Aug 22, 2017)

While I agree with other comments that the composition has two areas that compete for attention, they are both beautiful (love the sun beams behind the arch) and for me this creates a dynamic while viewing that is not entirely unpleasant. Unconventional, but great IMO. The HDR is not at all overpowering, and I might raise the shadows a bit to smooth the tones. Railings will be a cloning challenge, but if you just get rid of the one on the right, you could leave the left one as that side has the 'touch of man' already in the bridge (and that looks unclonable to me).


----------



## Woodwideweb (Aug 23, 2017)

I wonder if it is something to do with the respective distances. The location where I took the panorama is quite compact, and it almost looks like a corrected fisheye image (if that makes any sense).

Stevelee, how far away were you from the figure in the centre of the image? The skyline in the centre is much further away than the near side of the river, could that be one if the reasons for the more natural look? I was probably less than 10m from the rocks at the edge of the waterfall, which may contribute to the strange perspective. As you suggest, maybe I need to print it really big to get the full experience.

For me personally, it does capture the essence of that morning, there really was so much going on to photograph, so I suppose that the image has achieved at least one thing


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 23, 2017)

Woodwideweb said:


> For me personally, it does capture the essence of that morning, there really was so much going on to photograph, so I suppose that the image has achieved at least one thing



I think this highlights a lot of the challenges with landscape photography in particular - it reminds you of what you saw at the time and all the different elements of the scene seem 'right' - you did after all see them all in one sweep of the eyes. It is the classic Kodak strapline of 'we don't sell pictures we sell memories'. Someone who was not there only has your photo to go on and will more likely be struck by the technical side of things and whether things in the image 'compete' and 'distract'.

Two other situations spring to mind:
In a sunset scene the human visual system (eye + brain) will look at shadows and 'open them up' with a lot of detail but will 'close down' the highlights (the sunset) and blend it all into one picture. Try and do that in one photograph and it can look plain weird. 
Another is when you see a magnificent landscape you have all the emotion in it from being there. But back at home the temptation is to recreate that 'wow' moment by things like boosting saturation and if not done carefully can look unnatural. Like watching CSI: Miami on a good day.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 24, 2017)

Woodwideweb said:


> I wonder if it is something to do with the respective distances. The location where I took the panorama is quite compact, and it almost looks like a corrected fisheye image (if that makes any sense).
> 
> Stevelee, how far away were you from the figure in the centre of the image? The skyline in the centre is much further away than the near side of the river, could that be one if the reasons for the more natural look? I was probably less than 10m from the rocks at the edge of the waterfall, which may contribute to the strange perspective. As you suggest, maybe I need to print it really big to get the full experience.
> 
> For me personally, it does capture the essence of that morning, there really was so much going on to photograph, so I suppose that the image has achieved at least one thing



I was up toward the top of the hill near street level looking down into the park. You can tell I wasn't close from the size in the picture of the geese and of the person near the monument, or whatever it was. I was obviously much farther from the large buildings. The perspective makes them all look farther away than they really were, just like a wide-angle lens does.

And if your picture captures the essence of that morning, then it is successful at what it does. It should not be surprising that it evokes a more technical reaction on a photography-oriented forum. Normal people would react more to the experience, or they might not like the picture, but not know why. De gustibus and all that.


----------

