silent1
Well-known
Finally, I sold my X100 to a nice nerdy-looking girl who fell in love with it.
I wasn't using it that much anymore.
In a way, it was too easy to get pretty pictures with it.
That, and also the news of the X100T, which I might end up getting later this year.
But if I do, I'll try to make it my only camera.
I wasn't using it that much anymore.
In a way, it was too easy to get pretty pictures with it.
That, and also the news of the X100T, which I might end up getting later this year.
But if I do, I'll try to make it my only camera.
Rick Waldroup
Well-known
Texas Road House
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Out to Lunch
Ventor
maggieo
More Deadly
danielsterno
making soup from mud
horse stable stall:
chambrenoire
Well-known
X100 with the TCL-X100 tele-adapter
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Question:
Why is in-camera stitched panoramic so strongly size limited? The vertical size e.g. of a horizontal panoramic is much, much smaller than the vertical size of a simple pic. I think it's like, one third of the full size.
I understand there's some loss during stitching, but...not THAT much!
Is there an option to switch to "full size" or something?
Or i should just expose frames and stitch in PS
Why is in-camera stitched panoramic so strongly size limited? The vertical size e.g. of a horizontal panoramic is much, much smaller than the vertical size of a simple pic. I think it's like, one third of the full size.
I understand there's some loss during stitching, but...not THAT much!
Is there an option to switch to "full size" or something?
Or i should just expose frames and stitch in PS
Attachments
Last edited:
wallace
Well-known
Or i should just expose frames and stitch in PS
Yep. That's the only way...
tbhv55
Well-known
Question:
Why is in-camera stitched panoramic so strongly size limited? The vertical size e.g. of a horizontal panoramic is much, much smaller than the vertical size of a simple pic. I think it's like, one third of the full size.
I understand there's some loss during stitching, but...not THAT much!
Is there an option to switch to "full size" or something?
Or i should just expose frames and stitch in PS
If you switch the Panorama direction setting away from "Left to right" to the "Bottom to top" setting (or "Top to bottom"... depending upon preference) then rotate the camera through 90degrees (to a 'Portrait' position), you can then take horizontal panoramas at a size of 5120x2160px rather than 5120x1440px.
Hope this helps...
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
If you switch the Panorama direction setting away from "Left to right" to the "Bottom to top" setting (or "Top to bottom"... depending upon preference) then rotate the camera through 90degrees (to a 'Portrait' position), you can then take horizontal panoramas at a size of 5120x2160px rather than 5120x1440px.
Hope this helps...
yes thx. I've just read this hint on Ken Rockwell's site, lol. Should've thought of it myself. :bang: Gives extra 50% indeed.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Happiness at the movies
Japanese maple internment
Cascades fire smoke in the valley
Japanese maple internment
Cascades fire smoke in the valley
MikeWebb
Established
One from the weekend
I think it lacks apparent sharpness due to being submerged in water?
Mike
I think it lacks apparent sharpness due to being submerged in water?
Mike
tbhv55
Well-known
There's quite a nice 'dreaminess' about this. I don't think that sharpness is lacking, but maybe local contrast is. I tried (albeit very briefly) tweaking the local contrast, and also shadows and mid-tones in PS, but couldn't achieve any improvement that I considered worthwhile. Perhaps more time spent on it might have produced something, and almost certainly the original Raw would be a better place to start.
All that said, I quite like the shot as it is...
Leoshin
Established
MikeWebb
Established
@tbhv55 thank you for your kind commemnts and time
Have something different
Have something different
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
taemo
eat sleep shoot
this was taken in Feb 2013, shortly after I sold the X100 and bought the X100s.
might get another X100 once they are going for ~300-400.
miss the colors that you get from it
DSCF0176 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
might get another X100 once they are going for ~300-400.
miss the colors that you get from it
DSCF0176 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
DwF
Well-known
Nice Grab Shot!
Nice Grab Shot!
I wish this was sized a bit larger, I almost overlooked it because it is a bit busy.
Aside from the very subtle "cheeky" aspect (can't resist), I am drawn to the axis created by the woman's gazing at the dog who is pulling for all he's worth. Then the dogs head with tension creating a line following to the girls arm, and finally the tension let out in the ladies arm. Add to that the girls body leaning in the opposite direction.
And nothing wrong (IMO) with color on either model.......yes, a bit easier to realize on the older model
Always fun to see what people are shooting...very nice images here.
Nice Grab Shot!
I wish this was sized a bit larger, I almost overlooked it because it is a bit busy.
Aside from the very subtle "cheeky" aspect (can't resist), I am drawn to the axis created by the woman's gazing at the dog who is pulling for all he's worth. Then the dogs head with tension creating a line following to the girls arm, and finally the tension let out in the ladies arm. Add to that the girls body leaning in the opposite direction.
And nothing wrong (IMO) with color on either model.......yes, a bit easier to realize on the older model
Always fun to see what people are shooting...very nice images here.