PDA

View Full Version : Portrait verus Landscape The Gloves Are Off



newboy
04-02-2009, 04:09 AM
I can understand why, if shooting a one row panoramic photograph, the portrait position is preferable; the end result photograph is deeper and, because more shots are needed to cover the required view, the quality is better.

What a cannot understand is why the portrait position is preferred when shooting a multi-row panoramic. It is a case of either an extra row or an extra column but, at the end of the day, the number of shots required to cover the view is the same. The advantage I can see, from having the camera in the landscape mode, is a much sturdier and steadier setup. After all, we all know you only raise the centre column of a tripod as a last resort, so why stick a camera on the end of one arm, one joint and a lever?

Comments, views and education welcomed....

Terrywoodenpic
04-02-2009, 04:44 AM
I would suggest it is far easier to find linking control points especially if much sky is included.

nick fan
04-02-2009, 04:51 AM
I can understand why, if shooting a one row panoramic photograph, the portrait position is preferable; the end result photograph is deeper and, because more shots are needed to cover the required view, the quality is better.

What a cannot understand is why the portrait position is preferred when shooting a multi-row panoramic. It is a case of either an extra row or an extra column but, at the end of the day, the number of shots required to cover the view is the same. The advantage I can see, from having the camera in the landscape mode, is a much sturdier and steadier setup. After all, we all know you only raise the centre column of a tripod as a last resort, so why stick a camera on the end of one arm, one joint and a lever?

Comments, views and education welcomed....





first, it is easier to rotate the pano head horizontally than vertically. So portrait position is advantageous for multi-row as you reduce the number of rows. For fisheye lens, you only need a single row, plus zenith and nadir shot depending on focal length of the lens. When mounted in landscape mode, you may need 2 row plus zenith and nadir.
second, it is easier to design a pano head for mounting in portrait mode. It is more compact and require fewer parts.


nick

newboy
04-02-2009, 05:28 AM
"it is easier to design a pano head for mounting in portrait mode. It is more compact and require fewer parts."


nick
[/quote]

I have your N180 which must be the most simple of designs and construction (and I don't mean that in a negative way) surely it would be an easy task to produce a head to fit between the N180 and the tripod which comprised of two meshed gears and, as the top one ( the rotator side) moved against the tripod side one, the nodal (entrance pupil) position was maintained.

nick fan
04-02-2009, 07:48 AM
I have your N180 which must be the most simple of designs and construction (and I don't mean that in a negative way) surely it would be an easy task to produce a head to fit between the N180 and the tripod which comprised of two meshed gears and, as the top one ( the rotator side) moved against the tripod side one, the nodal (entrance pupil) position was maintained.


Hmm, can you post drawing of your design?

newboy
04-02-2009, 01:14 PM
I was originally thinking of two elliptical gears and as the bottom one was turned it would cant the arm over and either pull it back or move it forward, depending on whether the camera was being made to point up or down, to maintain the position of the rotation point to the tripod. Thinking about it, I thought it a bit over engineered and Victorian. All that is needed is a quadrant with two parallel slots .The shorter one at the top moves the rotator backwards or forwards to maintain it's position relative to the tripod and the lower groove rotates the whole assembly through he required number of degrees.

nick fan
04-02-2009, 08:30 PM
I was originally thinking of two elliptical gears and as the bottom one was turned it would cant the arm over and either pull it back or move it forward, depending on whether the camera was being made to point up or down, to maintain the position of the rotation point to the tripod. Thinking about it, I thought it a bit over engineered and Victorian. All that is needed is a quadrant with two parallel slots .The shorter one at the top moves the rotator backwards or forwards to maintain it's position relative to the tripod and the lower groove rotates the whole assembly through he required number of degrees.


If you can make a simple drawing, it will help me understand better. A picture is worth a thousand words when it comes to designing. :-)
Without digging into details of actual design, I can imagine it is more complicated than NN3/5.


Nick

newboy
04-03-2009, 02:47 AM
If you can make a simple drawing, it will help me understand better. A picture is worth a thousand words when it comes to designing. :-)
Without digging into details of actual design, I can imagine it is more complicated than NN3/5.


Nick




Here is a quick one.

newboy
04-03-2009, 04:25 AM
The centre point, to decide on the relative lengths of the slots, should be, of course, where the axis of the camera lens intersects the entrance pupil point.. Entrance Point Ninja doesn't sound so catchy, does it....

newboy
04-03-2009, 09:56 AM
This might give a better idea of just what I am on about.

nick fan
04-03-2009, 10:22 AM
This might give a better idea of just what I am on about.


From your picture, the rotation is not around the NPP. This will cause parallax.
Am I missing something? I can quite understand the first drawing.

Nick

bigwade
04-03-2009, 03:00 PM
This might give a better idea of just what I am on about.


Maybe this is what you are looking for?
In the old days I've worked with Sinar
To get the idea go to:

http://www.sinarcameras.com/site/index__gast-d-1250-23-1337-urlvars-rand-843.html

Go to "kameras" and click at p2
Under "Wie funktioniert es" is a small animation.
The middle of the vertical panel is always centered, so at NP (no rail
adjustments needed !)
The cogwheel system is a kind of nylon and very precise.
I have worked 20 Y with these camera's
Have Fun !

newboy
04-04-2009, 06:49 AM
From your picture, the rotation is not around the NPP. This will cause parallax.
Am I missing something? I can quite understand the first drawing.

Nick


Suppose the pivot is rep[ositioned so that it is between the rotator and the camera bracket. This should provide enough up and down movement whilst still maintaining a level horizon and a NP over the centre of the rotator. If you would like to knock off a quick prototype, I would be more than happy to road test it....

nick fan
04-04-2009, 08:53 AM
Suppose the pivot is rep[ositioned so that it is between the rotator and the camera bracket. This should provide enough up and down movement whilst still maintaining a level horizon and a NP over the centre of the rotator. If you would like to knock off a quick prototype, I would be more than happy to road test it....


what you suggested is similar to Nodal Ninja Ultimate R1.
http://nodalninja.com/forum/index.php?topic=655.0
it won't rotate around NPP in vertical rotation. You need to compensate the NPP offset. This won't be an easy task.


Nick

newboy
04-04-2009, 12:57 PM
what you suggested is similar to Nodal Ninja Ultimate R1.
http://nodalninja.com/forum/index.php?topic=655.0
it won't rotate around NPP in vertical rotation. You need to compensate the NPP offset. This won't be an easy task.


Nick


I'll just get a bracket and haul my camera into upright mode. Are there any forthcoming?