No, I didn't climb the roof - it is forbidden - but I put the camera on 4 locations: 1.window to WNW, 2. balcony to NNE, 3. window to ESE, 4. window to SSW and tried to stitch a continuous pano knowing that the PTGui tool isn't suited for this because it cannot correct the angle differences in photographs taken from different locations. However I tested the overlapping pictures to find out if it was possible and to select the best fits. This exercise allowed me to stitch the pictures from positions 1,2,3 to create a continuous view of 240 °. Because the overlapping mainly happened on the water surface of the river, the angle differences could be camouflaged. But it took 11 minutes to complete photographing meaning that the changing wind and wave patterns posed some problems. Position 4 however, which covers the southwestern land view, couldn't be integrated without error and will be shown in part 2.
So here is pano No. 100: a 240° continuous view from the 21st floor of the Waterfront green tower, beginning at the Port of Vlissingen up to the St Bavo Catherdral in Ghent. At the moment it was ebb neap tide -1.58 m NAP. The water of the river has a deep green-bluish color because there were almost no disturbances from big ships. The 70 mm (112 mm KB) originals reduced to the required 500 pixel height for this site, offer a view comparable to the naked eye experience. I have to admit that the view looks nicer on the pano than through the windows...
I very am proud that I was able to make a 100, quite differentiated panos from the Scheldt estuary, with a very small footprint!
Canon Eos M6 with EF-M 18-150 mm, part 1: 27 p RAW, 70 mm (112 mm KB), iso 125, f 11, 1/200, PTGuiPro, 81043x3868 1.26 GB TIFF, no crop, downsizing>1900>1000>500 TIFF>sharpening>10476x500 2.5MB JPEG
Jörg Braukmann, Arno Bruckardt, Klaus Brückner, Hans-Jörg Bäuerle, Friedemann Dittrich, Leonhard Huber, Walter Huber, Martin Kraus, Giuseppe Marzulli, Steffen Minack, Jan Lindgaard Rasmussen, Danko Rihter, Chris Rüger, Walter Schmidt, Björn Sothmann, Markus Ulmer, Jens Vischer, Benjamin Vogel, Augustin Werner
|
|
Comments
greetings Seb
So you call my pano 'great' and then you disqualify it to trash because of the building. Unbelievable! Poor people here.
To be clear: this is part I 240°of 326° that starts at the building at left and will be followed by part II ending at the building at right. I show the building, which obscures 34° of the full 360°, because I consider it as an essential element of the visual experience.
greetings Seb
I am shocked with all this and that you even do not use this opportunity to correct yourself. I don't dispute you are a bad photographer, on the contrary, but this is shameful.
Ich ärgere mich sehr das ich von Ihnen hier ständig beschimpft werde. Ich respektiere ihren Arbeitsaufwand, das gelungene Stitchergebnis, gute Schärfe und ein gutes Panorama.. Aber aus ästhetischen Gründen finde ich den Beginn des Panos sehr schlecht geeignet.. Ich werde mich auch nicht korrigieren, weil das meine Meinung ist.. Einige andere haben wahrscheinlich das gleiche gedacht und haben kommentarlos weiter geklickt.. Denn mindestens 20-30 aktive Mitglieder haben ja scheinbar ihr Panorama nicht bewertet.. Denn so ist das Bewertungssystem eben seit Jahren.. Entweder einem gefällt alles, dann gibt es vier Sterne.. Wenn eben nicht dann gibt es eine Enthaltung.. Ob das perfekt Is weiß ich nicht, es obliegt mir auch nicht das zu entscheiden..
Ich finde es aber sehr daneben das sie mich hier ständig beschimpfen. Jeder von uns hier kennt das wenn er sehr viel Arbeit in ein Projekt steckt und dann nicht den erwarteten Applaus bekommt.. Aber das gehört nun mal dazu, denn nicht alle Meinungen sind gleich.. Und das sind auch meine letzten Worte zu diesem Thema.
------
Now I write in German so no one misunderstands me ..
I am very annoyed that I am constantly berated by you here. I respect their effort, the successful stitch result, good sharpness and a good panorama .. But for aesthetic reasons, I think the beginning of the Panos very badly suitable .. I will not correct myself, because that's my opinion .. Some others probably have the same thought and have clicked without comment .. For at least 20-30 active members have apparently not evaluated their panorama .. Because the rating system is just for years .. Either you like everything, then there are four stars .. If not then there is an abstention .. Whether the perfect Is I do not know, it is not up to me to decide that ..
But I find it very wrong that they insult me here constantly. Every one of us knows this when he puts a lot of work into a project and then does not get the expected applause .. But that's part of it, because not all opinions are the same.
These are my last words on this topic
Sebastian
In my opinion he has an objective and fully ok reservation for not finding the pano perfect, and he communicated it in a fully ok way. Absolutely no reason to call it disrespektful. BR Jan.
It is the first time I expressed my displeasure against you and you started this polemic. If you dislike the building well move that part out of the screen, as simple as that. What a shame!
The pano is crisp clear and technically without any flaw. But there is always more than the sum of the technical aspects and that is exactly what Sebastian was trying to explain. His comments, in my mind, make totally sense, were not offending at all and gave an idea to make things better.
You should accept constructive criticism. If I would receive criticism or an idea for improvement, I would always be thankful.
So it looks like you got caught on the wrong foot :-)
Then I will delete my portfolio if this unprofessional discussion or disqualifying go on.
And to make things better by cutting off the building. Do you really think I have not thought about this? It is only a second and the thing is cut off. Of course I tested this and concluded the building at both sides is the right way to create a reality experience. You will see the symmetry soon.
I don't want to get involved in the rest of the argument! Cheers,
nachdem du mich persönlich ansprichst sehe ich mich gezwungen, in die Diskussion mit einzusteigen.
Zunächst einmal empfehle ich dir, die Diskussion auf eine sachliche Ebene zurückzuführen. Kritik, wenn Sie hier geäußert wird, betrifft generell die Bilder und nicht die Photographen. Die Art und Weise, wie jemand ein Bild beurteilt, bestimmt jeder selbst. Ich selbst freue mich auch über kritische Kommentare, führen die doch dazu, das eigene Arbeiten zu überdenken und sich weiterzuentwickeln. Finde ich die Kritik gerechtfertigt, dann setze ich die Anregungen um. Bin ich anderer Meinung, dann nicht.
Dein Bild ist in meinen Augen technisch perfekt. Aber auch ich hadere mit dem linken Teil, dem Gebäude. Wie jedes Panorama beginnen wir bei der Betrachtung ganz links. Und hier wirkt mir das Gebäude als zu wuchtig. Andererseits liefert es den Grund, warum es nicht weiter nach links geht, es begrenzt das Bild. Meiner Meinung nach hätte ein Bildschnitt weiter rechts, so dass vom Gebäude nur ein kleiner Teil noch zu sehen ist, ausgereicht. Wenn du hingegen meinst, das Gebäude müsse in so präsenter Form in das Bild eingebracht werden, dann argumentiere dafür und beleidige nicht diejenigen, die anderer Meinung sind.
Warum ich mich bei der Wertung enthalten habe, erkläre ich gerne. Es ist das Motiv, das mich nicht anspricht. Es hat in meinen Augen irgendwie keinen Höhepunkt, keine besondere Stimmung, keine Besonderheit. Ich denke so hat jeder seine eigene Sichtweise, wir sind keine Jury, die hier nach festgelegten Kriterien entscheidet. Der eine lehnt Kopfüber-Panoramen generell ab, der andere Drohnenaufnahmen. Ich finde das zwar bedauerlich, aber jedem sei seine persönliche Meinung gestattet.
Und nochmals, die Kritik gilt dem Bild, nicht dem Photographen. Viele deiner Werke schätze ich und bewerte und kommentiere diese auch gerne.
Ich empfehle dir dringend, den Kommentar, in dem du vielen Mitgliedern unserer Community vorwirfst, engstirnig zu sein, zu versachlichen.
Herzliche Grüße,
Dieter
Apart from that I really appreciate your contribution here, which does not mean that I have to endorse every single pano.
Regards Martin
This is part 1 of 2. The second part, which is the S-SW view, ends with the building at right so that symmetry is obtained. If it was possible I would have constructed the total 326° in 1 pano but given the different position of the camera, resulting in angle differences, this was not possible without error with PTGuiPro.
Although I have still a backlog of more than 30 panos, I will stop posting after the second part, because of the really ridiculous, shameful behaviour of several of the posters here that find pleasure to disqualify good work.
Unfortunately we have a totally different perception of what is happening here. I have seen nobody whose acts I would describe as shameful, ridiculous, stubborn, disqualifying or malicious. I have also seen nobody say these words to you. I fear this is all a big unfortunate misunderstanding on your side.
Best,
Martin
Then review the discussion with more calmness. I'm sure you would not repeat some parts of your comments.
Cheers, Hans-Jörg
I feel very sorry you are shaken by this but that wasn’t my intention.
I prepared this pano months ago and kept it for my 100th pano celebration. It is a first in the sense that I succeeded to stitch parts from 3 separate locations without visible error while I previously posted partial views. Also, I wanted to create an experience as if the viewer is on the 21st floor. Because 34° of the full 360° is obscured by the blue building, I thought and still think it is very opportune to include a little of the building at the beginning of the first part and at the end of the second part just like I experience this every day when I look out of the windows. The complete pano should have been judged once the second part was posted because then the symmetry would become visible. I think I communicated this clearly.
With this knowledge, would ‘you’ feel happy if someone starts with: “great pano” and then openly disqualifies it with no stars (= the same as a pano full of mistakes) because he doesn’t like the building, which by the way can easily be moved out of the screen without losing anything of the view itself. Because this kind of disqualification is possible with this oversimplistic rating system, which I consider as totally inferior, I saw and still see this as a total lack of respect. I am still very upset by this believe me. When I look to someone’s pano, I simply click the 4* from sympathy if it is done without serious error and that is how it should be used. Esthetics of course are important but this pano is especially intended to document the reality and not a souped up picture like many here try to do.
Concerning my remarks on recent panos. Can you show me where I was unobjective? I was very critical yes and especially for those who found the pleasure to disqualify my work, I simply mimicked their own behaviour or repeated their words (here above) to show how insulting this was to me. Obviously you see this differently because you are a bit of a patriarch of this website but that is how I still feel this unjustified situation.
I don’t know if I ever will continu with this and in the meantime play my guitar.
Thanks for your comment and the many very interesting discussions I enjoyed with you.
Nice regards,
Mentor
Leave a comment