[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Rollei] Re: Rollei panorama head, and "nodal points"


Why are you so defensive of your panoramic photo?


Carlos Manuel Freaza wrote:

> Excuse me please, if I bother with my pano photo
> again, but I need explain something:
>  Richard Knoppow wrote:
> ?...The mismatch can be seen in Carlos's photo but is
> not too obvious because of the subject matter and also
> the outstanding job of matching the tonal rendition of
> the sections. It can, however, be seen in the
> railing...?
> Siu Fai wrote:
> ?....Carlos, I notice some sharp bends in the fence of
> your photograph. I think these are typical distortions
> or mismatch for analogue stitched photos:::?
> I wrote:
> ?:::The railing is the subject closer to the camera,
> and it is slightly out of focus... If I used f/22 the
> ?bug? don?t exist, you can be sure...?
> I wrote this stupid remark due the term ?railing?
> confused me. I believed that Richard Knoppow referred
> to the vestibule door with a railing, not to the
> hence. This vestibule door with a railing  maybe has a
> hardly visible focus lack and there is an uneven roof
> between light and shadow behind it  that makes a
> strange geometrical figure (this isn?t a distortion).
> I believed that Richard and Siu alluded to this
> strange geometrical figure behind the vestibule door
> in their mails talking about distortions, mismatch and
> sharp bends. Yesterday, I had a rest and I read the
> messages again ( you consider that my English language
> is the English I learnt into school) and I looked the
> pano photo again, then I understood that Richard and
> Siu allude to the hence in first plane, not to the
> vestibule door.
> They are right, there is a union line in the hence so
> evident for me ( maybe because I joined the frames)
> that I thought it was evident for everybody, then, the
> commentaries couldn?t refer to a stuff so evident, I
> believed it.
> However, I must say  that the distortion or sharp bend
> in the hence  is exagerated due the following
> circunstances: a) There is a big water?s tank behind
> the camera projecting its shadow on the hence,
> coinciding the shadow?s limits with the hence. b) The
> hence changes its angle coinciding with tank?s shadow
> limits. c) Both frames coincide exactly to where the
> hence changes its angle and to where the tank?s shadow
> starts.
> I am conviced, without these circunstances , the union
> line would be hardly visible or almost invisible
> directly, but it demonstrates that I didn?t use a
> panorama software. I hope that I  understood Richard
> and Siu messages this time.
> All the best
> Carlos
> ------------
> Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión
> 4004-1010 desde Buenos Aires. Usuario: yahoo; contraseña: yahoo
> Más ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar