|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 5/29/2008
|
Thank you, Anne. I wonder what drew you to an old picture from a couple of years ago? I had almost forgotten this one. It is stitched from six photos taken 60 degrees apart! I hope to enjoy a look at your own photos once I can finish an urgent translation job! Till then...
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 5/29/2008
|
In early July I will be in England on my honeymoon. But from mid-July I will be here... Hope we can meet.
|
|
|
|
RC. Dany
{K:64104} 5/29/2008
|
Excellent .
|
|
|
|
|
Ho Beely
{K:226} 5/29/2008
|
Hahahaha, I will be in Japan on coming July. I will let you know later. Have a nice day sir.
BTW, this picture seems want to pull me inside it. Wooo... amazing. 
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 5/29/2008
|
Yes, indeed I remember you. One of the VERY FEW people who takes panoramas in vertical orientation. So you were in Tokyo, I see. Next time drop me a line via E-mail and we can meet.
|
|
|
|
|
Ho Beely
{K:226} 5/28/2008
|
Great photo indeed. Hi , Mr. Williams, do u remember me?
|
Shinjuku |
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/22/2006
|
Well, James, you certainly don't need to wait until you have a fisheye--their main advantage is that they cover a wider area (field of view) and therefore need fewer stitches. A standard wide-angle lens can be used very effectively. Drop a query in the "Panorama" photoforum if you are interested. Glad you liked it! Thanks...
|
|
|
|
Jimmy Piper
{K:5742} 8/22/2006
|
great shot, love the clarity. all this 360 talk makes me wanna get me a fisheye and learn the art of stitching and panoramas, great result..
|
|
|
|
|
Dubravko Grakalic
{K:25235} 8/15/2006
|
very nice panorama in digital, roger! and great office, too!:)
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/15/2006
|
Thanks, Cessy. With 360-degree wrap-around shots, composition is largely a matter of deciding where to place the center (it can be located anywhere around the circle). My desk is not visible. I sit in front of the window, the other side of the partition.
|
|
|
|
|
cessy karina
{K:14205} 8/14/2006
|
looks like you have great office :)
excellent shot, Roger
very well composed
|
|
|
|
|
jessie voigts
{K:6772} 8/11/2006
|
aren't computers grand? that is so cool that you can do this. i never even THOUGHT of it!
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/11/2006
|
Jessie, this is a full 360 degrees. I take (in this case) six shots and stitch them together on the computer. And I stand out of the way for each shot. You could do panoramas like this if you wanted to, although if you don't have a very wide angle lens you'd have to do more stitching. As for "creative" well, our company byline is "Creative Services & Internet Solutions." [grin]
|
|
|
|
|
jessie voigts
{K:6772} 8/11/2006
|
roger - your office looks very creative to me. that is so interesting, to be able to get a 360 (except the part where you're standing?)...i DO like the view out of your window, i remember those photos!!
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/8/2006
|
Ah yes, but here you have a European (me) choosing the office furniture... The views out of my window LEFT, DOWN and RIGHT are all together on the previous 30-photo page, called "Triptych - Out of my window." And further back there is:
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=924745
which is the view directly across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/8/2006
|
Thanks for pointing out the error in the lens data, Ray. Corrected now. This kind of panorama is what I got the D200 for, so it had better be good at it! Now I am getting a computer on steroids to do the graphic processing! Whoopee!!
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/8/2006
|
Hi, Brad. Thanks for dropping by. To tell you the truth I find the D200 pretty uncongenial, although I must admit it can do a nice job. I got it for professional work doing panoramas, but I am trying to get used to it by using it for private, personal things.
|
|
|
|
stingRay pt.4 .
{K:250401} 8/7/2006
|
Lots of interesting details to be seen at your office my dear Roger and some great effects from the 10.5mm lens (even although it says 18-70mm in the details section) I tried working out what sort of office it might be but gave up in the end. It's good to see you putting this camera and lenses through it's paces. Well done my friend.....Cheers....Ray
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Morris
{K:3307} 8/6/2006
|
Hi Roger, Long time no see. Good to be able to see your office is still there and going strong
I see you have taken the DSLR plunge. congrats. Are you enjoying it?
|
|
|
|
Giuliano Guarnieri
{K:36622} 8/6/2006
|
Hello Roger,
despite you work in Japan, our offices in Europe are not so different. Just a question , what do you see from your window?
Bye
GG
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Williams
{K:86139} 8/6/2006
|
Aha! But this was a Saturday afternoon, Matej... with only me in the office. The approach is very different with a DSLR, but is mainly concerned with narrow dynamic range, not resolution. I cope by bracketing and combining multiple exposures. With film, the limitation was grain--had to drop down to 100 ISO. The shop scans of my negatives are almost the same resolution as my D200 digital images (2,400 x 3,600 vs approx. 2,580 x 3,880), but the latter appear to be much sharper and clearer The Nikkor 10.5mm fisheye is a really splendid lens, although it does suffer from chromatic aberration which I have to remove using software. To answer your question, on the full-size file, 10,000 x 3,750, the titles are quite easily legible. Would you like a copy? [g]
|
|
|
|
Rashed Abdulla
{K:163889} 8/6/2006
|
Great panorama , the DOF is very great and so the composition and the sharpness , wishing you all of the best.
|
|
|
|
Matej Maceas
{K:24381} 8/6/2006
|
Another chance for me to use fspviewer. Nice! I get a feeling of human presence even though there aren't any people in the photo (where was everyone? the clock shows only a few minutes past 3).
I tried to read some of the book titles but the resolution is too coarse even with the large file... Are they readable on the original raw file? I'm thinking of this because you've been posting panos shot on 6xlong film and here's a move to a sub-35mm sensor. Are you experiencing any limitations (or necessity for a different approach) as a result of the smaller format?
|
|
0 
