06.05.2009, 16:55
Just an example of how you can stitch several continuous photos together to make a single panoramic shot.
[img]
This particular image was made with 3 screenshots stitched together in a seamless and even palette freeware program called Hugin (http://hugin.sourceforge.net/). The following with 6 screenshots
[/img]
It's the best software I've even found that does seamless panoramic stitching. It's heavy on computing and therefore not very fast, but the results are generally great. It does give results that need to be cropped due to the skewing and resizing done in order to match up photos with each other. And you do need photos with large identical parts so that they can be fit together.
I've done a number of land and cityscapes with this program, but it wasn't until tonight that I realized you can make panoramic views of map landscapes with it just as well. This is not the most stunning view, but is given as an example.
One tip should you ever use it. Use the automated assistant, but always save images as 'jpeg', never as a .tiff or your colors will be as whacky as a '60's underground press layout.
[/img]
[img]
This particular image was made with 3 screenshots stitched together in a seamless and even palette freeware program called Hugin (http://hugin.sourceforge.net/). The following with 6 screenshots
[/img]
It's the best software I've even found that does seamless panoramic stitching. It's heavy on computing and therefore not very fast, but the results are generally great. It does give results that need to be cropped due to the skewing and resizing done in order to match up photos with each other. And you do need photos with large identical parts so that they can be fit together.
I've done a number of land and cityscapes with this program, but it wasn't until tonight that I realized you can make panoramic views of map landscapes with it just as well. This is not the most stunning view, but is given as an example.
One tip should you ever use it. Use the automated assistant, but always save images as 'jpeg', never as a .tiff or your colors will be as whacky as a '60's underground press layout.
[/img]
