Unfinished Ngorongoro Pano

[Hilary Hann]

Unfinished because something is bugging me with it and I can't put my finger on it so any help would be appreciated. It is a 5 image stitch and whilst I used photo merge in photoshop I had to do a bit of manual blending as well. I think it has left an unevenness but then there was some darker patches of the sky naturally as well. I don't really like the central placement of the far wall of the caldera but I have no more sky or foreground. Is it worth pursuing or should I put it out to pasture?
5D2: 24-70 @ 58mm; ISO200; 1/8ss; f8

[Don Railton]

Hi Hilary

I pretty sure I would continue with this if it were mine... As presented its quite dark in the foreground and if you could lighten this (adding detail) without noise being introduced carry on IMHO. Being a stitch there is undoubtedly a lot more detail than can be seem with this size image so it difficult to see what to include and not include but from what I can see I would consider cropping from the right level with the first 'H' in your name. I would also want to add a little to the LHS edge so the ridge in the distance links up with the ridge in the foreground (I am presuming this is how the landscape actually is..). Do you have another image of LHS to allow this? In this way you get to see the complete 'bowl' and I think that enough... The sky is also a little dark and moody and needs lightening/ softening I think as its drawing too much attention away from the landscape. Is this a meteorite crater??

DON

[Hilary Hann]

Thank you Don for taking the time to give me such a comprehensive response. You make good suggestions which I'll try to make work. I'm not sure whether I have the lhs crater wall and I can't imagine why I didn't include it at the time. But I have a long series of images so will go hunting. The sky is dark and moody, but can easily be less so and maybe that will work better.
Not a meteorite crater but a blown volcano. I believe that it once stood taller than Kilimanjaro.
Again, really appreciate your reply.

[Don Railton]

Its quite a view Hilary...Good luck..

DON

[Roman Kurywczak]

Having been there a few times, I see why you are concerned on this Hilary......I think a large pano shown here doesn't do it justice at the small posting size. I am a bit bothered by the curvature of clouds....or at least it appears that way....perhpas lightening or pathing in the UR and UL corners? I think this may work and I do think you should continue to explore this image!

[Morkel Erasmus]

Nice work on stitching this one Hilary. You chose a good focal length too (58mm), as one needs to be at least at 35mm effective FOV to minimise the excessive bending of the horizon that happens with stitching. Was this shot in landscape or portrait orientation? I find that shooting in portrait gives better balance to the overall comp and also reduces the bending factor if you shoot your frames close to each other.

I see what Don and Roman are saying. For me, I like the dark sky and would just work on ligthening the FG slightly. Not having the LHS is unfortunate though...but I don't mind having the RHS edge where you have it. :S3:

For reference - here is an image I posted a few years ago that is comprised of 7 vertical (portrait) shots as opposed to landscape orientation. Doing it this way also allows you to shoot shorter focal lengths (this was 18mm x 1.6 = 28.8mm effective FOV).
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/59426-A-Mighty-Fish-River-Canyon-Vista

[Jay Gould]

Hilary, I think Roman may be on the right track regarding the clouds. When I first looked at it my reaction was a bit of a fisheye lens that had been bent to be straightened into a pano.

I also agree with Morkel that you need a longer than wide to do a wide stitch to avoid the bending - the referenced posting by Morkel is amazing!! I too am shooting more stitches in portrait mode.

I gave it a shot as follows; Cropped from the left as indicated.

I know you too are a fan of TK's actions:

I put on the 10% grid for a bit more control.

Shadow Darks: anchored the line from 30% to the top and opened up the shadow line about 5%

Expanded lights: took it down about 5+%

Burn/Dodge: lightened the two upper corners to eliminate some of the obvious bending.

Vibrance masks to add color to the sky.

I might consider opening up the foreground a bit more; what do you think?

[Hilary Hann]

Thanks for all the great suggestions for what I've found to be a frustrating project. I'll have a closer look at them all.
Roman, the curvature has been bugging me too, so I'll look at that.
Morkel, this was done as a horizontal capture/stitch as I am a bit hamstrung with the light carbon fibre tripod I travel with, it just won't stay steady enough for verticals I've found. But your points are perfectly true and at home, where I can pull out the studio tripod, vertical is the way to go. Love your pano but don't take it to HDR (horrible, horrible). It is just beautiful without it.
Jay, thanks for the repost. I'll go and try some additional TK masks (you are right, they form an important part of my everyday workflow).

You have all given me some ideas so thank you for your generosity. I'll repost when I have worked it, but must finish my tax first! :bugeyed:

[Robert Amoruso]

Hilary,

The curvature would be corrected in a full automated blending but you said you did this with Photomerge and manually so that may be the problem.

I have had he same trouble at the water as PS cannot auto-blend due to the lack of definite objects to key the merges to. Comes out with curved FGs and skies.

[Morkel Erasmus]

AutoPano Pro works great for merging large panos and correcting distortion very naturally...

[Hilary Hann]

Thanks Robert and Morkel, I am finally feeling that I'm coming to grips to the problems of this image so onwards ........... :S3:

[Andrew McLachlan]

Hi Hilary, it is a lovely scene...good suggestions above. Look forward to a repost. :S3: