We have a wall at SmugMug that is begging for a jaw-dropping pano. We know we want the SF skyline, probably from Bay Bridge to a little past Coit tower. A lot like the shot in the next post, but with supreme sharpness & dynamic range.

I know it's a matter of taste, but ours runs towards seeing the buildings up close & personal, with people in the windows and along the water front. We're not too much into an expanse of water or sky.

One of our fav SF shots, which hangs on our walls, is a variation of the one in the next post by Chris Michel. We like being able to see people and details.

Anyway, on the pano we're trying to shoot, does anyone know whether we'd get better results using Hasselblad's H3D? I have a friend with one who claims it has extraordinary dynamic range.

I'm a little concerned about how long a lens we'd end up using with it and what it implies for f-stop to get close enough to fill the frame mostly with buildings.

Would love to hear your advice.

Actually, I take it back. The above pano is in a 12:1 ratio of width to height. Our room actually permits a 60-inch high print continuing across 3 walls for a total length of 700 inches, an almost 12:1 ratio.

Originally Posted by Baldy Anyway, on the pano we're trying to shoot, does anyone know whether we'd get better results using Hasselblad's H3D? I have a friend with one who claims it has extraordinary dynamic range. I'm a little concerned about how long a lens we'd end up using with it and what it implies for f-stop to get close enough to fill the frame mostly with buildings. Would love to hear your advice.

There are rumors that the Hasselblad H3D-39 uses true 16 bit A/D sampling and does indeed have very nice dynamic range. One major issue you will have to contend with is noise above ISO 200. This would make a night shot that includes people and large DOF a challenge to say the least.

In this regard, a Nikon D3 with very long lenses and a programmable tripod head, to do the incremental tilts and swings, might be the (currently) best way to go. I'm talking in the hundreds of images, stitched together.

Inspiration:

Gigapixel image using, I believe, a Canon D60, 196 exposures across 13 minutes, 40,784 x 26,800 pixels total.
http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm

Inspiration:

13 gigapixel image using 2045 individual images, Nikon D2X, Nikkor 300mm lens, PixOrb head, Autopano Pro software.

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/con...l-Panorama.htm

Originally Posted by ziggy53 There are rumors that the Hasselblad H3D-39 uses true 16 bit A/D sampling and does indeed have very nice dynamic range. One major issue you will have to contend with is noise above ISO 200. This would make a night shot that includes people and large DOF a challenge to say the least.

Yeah, I'm reading that the dynamic range is amazing but the noise isn't so good above 200. Most guys shoot 50 or 100.

Here's a really good comparison: http://www.photos-of-the-year.com/articles/d2x-h3d/

Excerpt:

The increased level of image detail was expected. The shocker was the dynamic range – this is where the H3D really distinguishes itself. With the D2X, I frequently resorted to bracketing just about any scene with meaningful dynamic range (often 5 or 7 exposures) and then combining them using layer masks in post (I always found this to achieve much better results than HDR in CS2). With the H3D you nearly have to be taking a picture of the sun to blow highlights. In scene after scene where the D2X would have suffered from massive blown highlights, HD3 handled the capture with ease. The difference is truly dramatic, will significantly shorten my landscape workflow, and should improve the resulting images. A sample image from my trip to Death Valley may be found here: http://www.pbase.com/hattenbach/image/77570448 . With the D2X this scene would have required blending at least two bracketed exposures (one for the ground, one for the sky). This image is straight from the camera, curves and levels applied and then downsized for the web. Less than a minute of processing.

Here's a 1 gigapixel image of Chicago's night skyline, displayed using "Zoomify":

http://www.docbert.org/ChicagoByNight/

P.S. Technical for above:

Total Resolution Approx 1000 Megapixel (67,000 x 15,000 pixels)
Camera Used Canon 10D, Canon 100-400L lens
Total Photos Used 194, almost all at 510mm (35mm equiv)
Exposure 4 second, f/6.7, ISO 200
Time to take Photos 58 minutes
Software Used to Create Image Autopano Pro
Final Image Size 7 GB!
Web Viewer Software Zoomify, with over 20,000 demand-loaded images

http://www.docbert.org/ChicagoByNight/cbninfo.html

Originally Posted by ziggy53 Here's a 1 gigapixel image of Chicago's night skyline, displayed using "Zoomify": http://www.docbert.org/ChicagoByNight/ P.S. Technical for above: Total Resolution Approx 1000 Megapixel (67,000 x 15,000 pixels) Camera Used Canon 10D, Canon 100-400L lens Total Photos Used 194, almost all at 510mm (35mm equiv) Exposure 4 second, f/6.7, ISO 200 Time to take Photos 58 minutes Software Used to Create Image Autopano Pro Final Image Size 7 GB! Web Viewer Software Zoomify, with over 20,000 demand-loaded images http://www.docbert.org/ChicagoByNight/cbninfo.html

Note the exposure, "4 second, f/6.7, ISO 200".

To get more people to show up I would suggest no longer than 1/4 second shutter, and that would imply ISO 3200 at f6.7. That's why I suggest the Nikon D3. With a 3 frame exposure bracket at each position you should have similar DR to the Hasselblad with much better noise control. You would simply disregard the DR in favor of people for those frames where it mattered.

Originally Posted by ziggy53 Inspiration: Gigapixel image using, I believe, a Canon D60, 196 exposures across 13 minutes, 40,784 x 26,800 pixels total. http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm

that self proclaimed record must fall.

Originally Posted by ziggy53 Note the exposure, "4 second, f/6.7, ISO 200". To get more people to show up I would suggest no longer than 1/4 second shutter, and that would imply ISO 3200 at f6.7. That's why I suggest the Nikon D3. With a 3 frame exposure bracket at each position you should have similar DR to the Hasselblad with much better noise control. You would simply disregard the DR in favor of people for those frames where it mattered.

Interesting, Ziggy. How will the moving people look blended with a 3-frame exposure bracket?

Originally Posted by AaronNelson baldy, i would really like to see your SF skyline "end result" posted here after you get it....thanks

You can bet we'll post it plus take shots of the room. And we're gonna have open houses. Man, I hope we can get this right.

Originally Posted by Baldy Interesting, Ziggy. How will the moving people look blended with a 3-frame exposure bracket?

Originally Posted by ziggy53 ... You would simply disregard the DR in favor of people for those frames where it mattered.

In other words, you would only use a single exposure, the most correct for all the elements but adjusted to suit taste. The other exposures (without people) would be discarded. (The single exposure might have to be manipulated and duplicated to simulate multiple exposures just to satisfy the automated HDR of the software used to assemble the images.)

You would only have to do this for images with people or other movement. Yes, it would be tiresome and a pain.

Originally Posted by ziggy53 In other words, you would only use a single exposure, the most correct for all the elements but adjusted to suit taste. The other exposures (without people) would be discarded. (The single exposure might have to be manipulated and duplicated to simulate multiple exposures just to satisfy the automated HDR of the software used to assemble the images.) You would only have to do this for images with people or other movement. Yes, it would be tiresome and a pain.

You can also do it after the fact. Do the HDR blend and then if there are problem areas due to movement, go back to the original exposures and select pieces from the one that best fits the tonal characteristics. The pieces can also be manipulated as well, if need be.

Well, this is gonna be interesting. I did some test shots with my MKIII and had a few issues. One was vibration with the 300mm lens in the wind. Another was the windows and lights were definitely white holes burned in the photo until I blended the bracketed exposures. It was late and there were few pedestrians out, so I think I'm gonna lose the requirement to show people in the shot.

I ended up at Keeble & Schuchat this afternoon to get the brief on how to use the H3 and a couple of other H3 owners/working pros came in and talked about their experiences and why they spilled the big bucks. I rented it for a car show next week thinking I'd be the only freak with one, but Ron Kimball uses his for all his car shots so maybe I'll be just another bloke.

Originally Posted by Baldy Well, this is gonna be interesting. I did some test shots with my MKIII and had a few issues. One was vibration with the 300mm lens in the wind. Another was the windows and lights were definitely white holes burned in the photo until I blended the bracketed exposures. It was late and there were few pedestrians out, so I think I'm gonna lose the requirement to show people in the shot. I ended up at Keeble & Schuchat this afternoon to get the brief on how to use the H3 and a couple of other H3 owners/working pros came in and talked about their experiences and why they spilled the big bucks. I rented it for a car show next week thinking I'd be the only freak with one, but Ron Kimball uses his for all his car shots so maybe I'll be just another bloke.

The Hasselblad H3 should work fine at low ISO and longer shutter speeds.

You might be able to avoid some of the wind problems by using a photographers "blind" or some other type of wind break. I would like to be there when you explain what you are doing to the local keepers of the law.

If it was easy, anybody could do it.

dont skip the people idea, i think you should stage some human element into this...whats wrong with posing some people into the shot to hold for the expo?