Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

  1. #1
    Senior Member etrump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    Anyone use autopano pro with Phase One raw files? I would appreciate any feedback on your experiences. I am curious on the real world advantages over photoshop.

    Ed

  2. #2
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    I didn't know that AutoPano Pro could process or stitch raw files. I've used Auto Pano Pro successfully in the past when older versions of PS couldn't (for whatever reason) successfully complete a single row pano. APP just worked. But this was with older versions of PS (I think around CS3 timeframe?) and I think current versions of PS CC are much more effective with stitching now, and I no longer use APP.

    Maybe if you had a real stinker, you might try APP or PTgui, but otherwise I simply use PS CC now.

    ken

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    210
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    14

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    I usually stitch 16bit TIFF files processed in CI.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    Ed:

    I use both autopano Pro (Kolor) and PTgui, along with CC for stitching with P1 files.

    Autopano will have problems with the exif info, as for some reason, C1 does not export it the way it's needed by Autopano Pro, PTGUI seems OK. But even PTgui seems to have problems seeing all the focal data, from a tech camera, since the lens info is missing and PTgui will ask for the sensor size sometimes and other times it sees it correctly. But both tools allow for an easy way to input the data when needed. I seems that both companies are not looking much at the Phase One files when writing the programs.

    I have found that most inline stitching CC will do fine, but there are certain times where I have a lot of color shifting even with the LCC correction in C1, (mainly with the 40mm Rod and blue skies), where I can't get a good blend with CC, especially if I had a CLPL on. With nodal pans from a tech camera, the wider the lens, the less likely CC will get a good solution even with a pretty good nodal placement.

    PTGUI and Autopano work better on nodal pans, as they give you a lot more solutions to pick from. They also work much better on multi-layer stitches, like 6 ot 9 shots, where CC seems to both get bogged down and lost at times. CC's engine is pretty much the same as CS5, I see no changes or differences in results between all of them. Where as both PTGui and Autopano make a lot of upgrades.

    Exposure blending again I often will have to work with all three at times to find one tool that gets the best solution. Solid blue skies with a lot of gradient to the sky will be the most problematic, and PTGui works very well here.

    All 3 work fine on 16 bit images (but CC can bog down on multilayer stitches in 16 bit for me) I am windows based all 64 bit.

    You will find a ton of control features in both Autopano and PTgui, none in CC, Both tools I feel would benefit from a better user guide, but I have basically learned by trial and error. Autopano has a nice video guide that can help.

    I just finished what I though would be a simple 3 part from a 15mm L C and 15mm R stitch, that I ended up having to use both tools to finally get a good solution. But most times I get a clean one the first time.

    I would consider both of them, along with CC.

    Paul

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    AutoPano does stitch RAW files, but with IQ files does not quite work. I spoke to them about it a while ago, but have not seen much progress.

    Doesn't matter though if you are using a tech cam, as LCC files still need to be processed in C1, so I think it is still best to do the conversion in C1, and work with AutoPano in 16bit TIFF.

    With flat stitching, I find the PS does a fine job, it is quite rare when I use AP.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    110
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    I would never even expect a tool like Autopano Pro to stitch raw files. You will always be better off doing the raw conversions yourself and then stitching, no matter the software used.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Posts
    1,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    Sorry, I missed the "raw" files bit. Never tried it before, as I always convert first then stitch. The Phase Files always have a LCC anyway, so they need the conversion and non Phase files I feel the other tools C1 or LR have more control on the raw conversion.

    Paul

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Autopano pro with P1 raw files

    Ed,

    All of my work was done using AutoPano Pro. I have had great results with it. I usually do minor tweaking on the photos in C1 including applying any LCC. I then stitch the TIFF files using autopano pro and then import them back into C1 or LR depending on the situation. Not sure if this is the best thing to do but I have had good results using Autopano Pro. One time I was utterly blown away by the program and I will tell you what I did. The photo I took called "RUSH" on my website of Snoqualmie Falls in WA was all done using AutoPano Pro. Now here is the strange part. I took a photo of the waterfall closer to it, and then went to an entirely new location further away and took some more photos of it. For whatever reason, I don't remember, I put both the close up photos and the further away photos both into AutoPano pro and voila, it stitched them together and gave me the RUSH picture. I have no clue how the stretching/blending/magic worked but somehow it gave me a clean file without any artifacts. I like the program needless to say.

    Mark

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •