Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Can anyone explain how these were made?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/20/planetary-panoramas-vincent-brady_n_5515505.html

I am experienced both at "night" photography and at making "little
planets," but these are something else! Do you think there is a way to
make them that doesn't require four cameras and four fisheye lenses?

Your thoughts?

--
   -- Peter

Peter A. Schaible



www.sundance360.com


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Vincent details his workflow here:
http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas

You can also communicate with him directly here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/

Trausti


On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:47 PM, 'Peter A. Schaible' [hidden email]
[PanoToolsNG] <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Can anyone explain how these were made?
>
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/20/planetary-panoramas-vincent-brady_n_5515505.html
>
> I am experienced both at "night" photography and at making "little
> planets," but these are something else! Do you think there is a way to
> make them that doesn't require four cameras and four fisheye lenses?
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> --
> -- Peter
>
> Peter A. Schaible
>
> www.sundance360.com
>
>  
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
>
>
> Vincent details his workflow here: http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas
>
> You can also communicate with him directly here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/

What's going wrong? - he's stacking his hundreds of frames into only four star-trail
fish eye shots, and then stitching the pano from those four frames.

He's manually placing (fair enough) 30 to 40 control points, and yet says
"this usually takes me several hours."

At 30-40 CPs per seam, that's 160 CPs in (say) 5 hours, 1.8 minutes per CP.

That's not my experience of manual CPs at all.

  BugBear

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Seriously: Ask him, not me.  The results of his works speaks louder than
anything anyone in the panoramic world has ever managed to utter ... EVER
... when it comes to startrail panos. Personally I don't care if he used 1
second or 3 weeks to place a single control point... what he has done, is
exceptionally nice.


On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:13 AM, paul womack [hidden email]
[PanoToolsNG] <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
> >
> >
> > Vincent details his workflow here:
> http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas
> >
> > You can also communicate with him directly here:
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/
>
> What's going wrong? - he's stacking his hundreds of frames into only four
> star-trail
> fish eye shots, and then stitching the pano from those four frames.
>
> He's manually placing (fair enough) 30 to 40 control points, and yet says
> "this usually takes me several hours."
>
> At 30-40 CPs per seam, that's 160 CPs in (say) 5 hours, 1.8 minutes per CP.
>
> That's not my experience of manual CPs at all.
>
> BugBear
>
>  
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
>
>
> Seriously: Ask him, not me.  The results of his works speaks louder than anything anyone in the panoramic world has ever managed to utter ... EVER ... when it comes to startrail panos. Personally I don't care if he used 1 second or 3 weeks to place a single control point... what he has done, is exceptionally nice.

Have I misunderstood the purpose of a discussion list?

  BugBear

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
In reply to this post by PanoTools NG mailing list
paul womack [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:

> Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
>>
>>
>> Vincent details his workflow here: http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas
>>
>> You can also communicate with him directly here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/
>
> What's going wrong? - he's stacking his hundreds of frames into only four star-trail
> fish eye shots, and then stitching the pano from those four frames.
>
> He's manually placing (fair enough) 30 to 40 control points, and yet says
> "this usually takes me several hours."
>
> At 30-40 CPs per seam, that's 160 CPs in (say) 5 hours, 1.8 minutes per CP.
>
> That's not my experience of manual CPs at all.

Ah; I'd only looked at the still shots on the page, not the video. It looks like he's
stitching (and CP'ing) each frame of the video from 4 star-stax'd images separately.

I don't understand why.

Surely using a template project, based on a sample 4 image set would provide a transform
set for all the frames from a given camera position, which would then be scriptable?

  BugBear
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Personally I have never attempted anything even remotely related to what
Vincent has done... but I would assume that a template in PTGui should
really be the easiest and best choice... but then again... a lot of bright
stars in the sky are moving between frames, so maybe that is the reason why
he can't use a template  that easily?

I am not encouraging silencing of the original question... I rather want to
see all questions asked and answered. I am simply not capable of providing
the needed answers ... therefore I suggested taking direct contact with the
creator of the content in question.


On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 5:20 AM, paul womack [hidden email]
[PanoToolsNG] <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> paul womack [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
> > Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Vincent details his workflow here:
> http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas
> >>
> >> You can also communicate with him directly here:
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/
> >
> > What's going wrong? - he's stacking his hundreds of frames into only
> four star-trail
> > fish eye shots, and then stitching the pano from those four frames.
> >
> > He's manually placing (fair enough) 30 to 40 control points, and yet says
> > "this usually takes me several hours."
> >
> > At 30-40 CPs per seam, that's 160 CPs in (say) 5 hours, 1.8 minutes per
> CP.
> >
> > That's not my experience of manual CPs at all.
>
> Ah; I'd only looked at the still shots on the page, not the video. It
> looks like he's
> stitching (and CP'ing) each frame of the video from 4 star-stax'd images
> separately.
>
> I don't understand why.
>
> Surely using a template project, based on a sample 4 image set would
> provide a transform
> set for all the frames from a given camera position, which would then be
> scriptable?
>
> BugBear
>
>  
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
In reply to this post by PanoTools NG mailing list
The science of how to is always interesting.. For me I would likely not take something like this on.. I did however really very much enjoy viewing his work.. I feel it is stunning , innovative and somewhat unique.. The concept of stacking 360's followed by turning many into a video with the subject matter he has chosen.. Incredibly dramatic and certainly most enjoyable to view.. He's a visual artist for sure.. just sayin.........

jimbo

----- Original Message -----
  From: paul womack [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG]
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:20 AM
  Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion


   
  paul womack [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
  > Trausti Hraunfjord [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
  >>
  >>
  >> Vincent details his workflow here: http://www.vincentbrady.com/planetarypanoramas
  >>
  >> You can also communicate with him directly here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/panoramicphotographers/
  >
  > What's going wrong? - he's stacking his hundreds of frames into only four star-trail
  > fish eye shots, and then stitching the pano from those four frames.
  >
  > He's manually placing (fair enough) 30 to 40 control points, and yet says
  > "this usually takes me several hours."
  >
  > At 30-40 CPs per seam, that's 160 CPs in (say) 5 hours, 1.8 minutes per CP.
  >
  > That's not my experience of manual CPs at all.

  Ah; I'd only looked at the still shots on the page, not the video. It looks like he's
  stitching (and CP'ing) each frame of the video from 4 star-stax'd images separately.

  I don't understand why.

  Surely using a template project, based on a sample 4 image set would provide a transform
  set for all the frames from a given camera position, which would then be scriptable?

  BugBear


 
  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3972/7731 - Release Date: 06/23/14
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
In reply to this post by PanoTools NG mailing list
Am 24.06.2014 11:39, schrieb paul womack:
> Have I misunderstood the purpose of a discussion list?

Of course not, but you ask a question only he can answer...

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de


------------------------------------

------------------------------------

--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: [hidden email]

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
In reply to this post by PanoTools NG mailing list
Am 23.06.2014 23:47, schrieb Peter A. Schaible:
> Do you think there is a way to
> make them that doesn't require four cameras and four fisheye lenses?

If you use a full circular fisheye pointing straight up you can shoot
the whole sky at once without the need to stitch the star trails itself.
This way the resolution would be limited, but you'll omit the problem of
star trails being interrupted along the seams.

Another way would be to to stitch the trails separately such that the
end of a trail would align to the start of the same star's trail in the
next image. This way time would be the limiting factor, if you want to
shoot all images in one night and you would be limited to plain streaks
(no saucer or comet effect, like in Vincent's images).

And last you could create artificial star trails. If you shoot the night
sky with relatively short exposure such that the stars are points and
orient the resulting panorama such that the north star (Polaris) is in
the zenith you can use photoshop motion blur filter to create horizontal
streaks in the equirect image. Once reprojected to normal orientation
you get trails rotating around the north star. This is more or less the
opposite of reducing star trails to star images like shown in
http://www.panotools.org/dersch/startrail/trail.html
Of course you'd need a night sky panorama which covers both the sky at
the beginning of the "trails" and at their end in order to have full
"trails" for all stars (even those who rise after your first shot). But
it might be enough to shoot one panorama soon after dusk and one just
before dawn and stitch them such that you get most of the sky.

For the last two methods the landscape needs to be overlayed with a mask
of course.

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de


------------------------------------

------------------------------------

--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: [hidden email]

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
In reply to this post by PanoTools NG mailing list
> schrieb paul womack:
>> Have I misunderstood the purpose of a discussion list?


Erik Krause wrote:
> Of course not, but you ask a question only he can answer...


Actually, what Vincent Brady has created is *very* impressive, but that
doesn't mean the technical methods couldn't be improved.

First of all, a stitcher template would be eminently sensible, and it
would mean stitching could be done without further control points. Sure,
things are moving in the sky, but that's irrelevant; the shots are all
from the same positions so each set can be stitched without having to
fuss with CPs once the correct values have been set up once.

Second, judging by the shot at the start that shows a large metal '+'
with the cameras mounted at the end of each arm, the cameras are much
further offset than they need to be. Moving them as close together as
possible would make the output more reliable.

Creatively? Lovely stuff.

k
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
Am 29.07.2014 18:12, schrieb Keith Martin:
> Second, judging by the shot at the start that shows a large metal '+'
> with the cameras mounted at the end of each arm, the cameras are much
> further offset than they need to be. Moving them as close together as
> possible would make the output more reliable.

You could even use a one shot solution. A circular fisheye pointed
straight up covers the whole sky, which would be perfect for long
exposures. And since those comet-like star trails are more or less
artificial anyway (normal star trails don't fade), one could think about
completely artificial trails.

As Helmut Dersch showed years ago
<http://www.panotools.org/dersch/startrail/trail.html> star trails are
straight and equally long in an equirectangular projection with the
zenith at polaris. So it should be easy to create "star trails" by a
simple motion blur of a sky panorama. (In fact it's not so easy, since
the trails darken due to blur. You need to duplicate layer with mode
lighten, shift 1px and flatten). This would reduce shooting to start and
end of the night in order to also cover stars that rise during the night.

Furthermore stars are colored. This is seldom visible, since stars show
as points which are overexposed very quickly while other stars are not
even visible. If you defocus slightly, stars are more like disks, which
don't overexpose that fast. Could be light pollution prohibits this - I
discovered it on altiplano in Peru 4000m above sea level and hundreds of
miles away from any city, one of the darkest regions on earth.

--
Erik Krause
http://www.erik-krause.de


------------------------------------

------------------------------------

--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: [hidden email]

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Dizzying Panoramas Of Stars In Motion

PanoTools NG mailing list
On 2014-07-29 2:26 PM, Erik Krause [hidden email] [PanoToolsNG] wrote:
> You could even use a one shot solution. A circular fisheye pointed straight up
> covers the whole sky, which would be perfect for long exposures. And since
> those comet-like star trails are more or less artificial anyway (normal star
> trails don't fade), one could think about completely artificial trails.

http://www.tawbaware.com/startracer.htm


--
Jim Watters
http://photocreations.ca



------------------------------------

------------------------------------

--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: [hidden email]

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/