Quote:

---

Good job...and GREAT topic....

The key to large panos is not just to show more information, but to still keep some kind of composition.

That is tough as you have to use your minds eye to create what you want before you evern start snapping. I catch myself trashing panos all the time because I didnt like or couldnt crop a composition out of the finished stich.

Tip, shoot RAW + smaller JPG when you start shooting panos. This allows you to test stich smaller footprint panos so you can easily figure out which one is worth the effort.

You dont need super expensive equipment to shoot them either....nodial point ballheads are expensive and DO have a purpose, but a tripod with a level (so your shure your tripod is true) and a quick attach plate or hotshoe level will bring the camera into shape.

I shoot all my panos portrait style (with the camera on its side)and usually the longer the lens...the less overlap needed....12MM = 1/3 overlap....200MM you can get away with about 1/5 or somwhere around there.

Good luck everyone.....oh...and my first BIG pano was of one of the BIGGEST places I can imagine....(it was done with a coolpix...so don't gig me on the quality...lol) Composition isnt the best...but I was not shooting for composition...but for vastness...trying for the first time to convey how HUGE the Grand Canyon truly is.

Roman

---

Roman,

All great pano advice. I agree wholeheartedly about trying to maximize composition in a pano. But as with your GC pic,
I find that many times composition takes a backseat to scope in a pano. Actually I think that scope can sometimes
work against composition. With composition you are often looking for focus and anchor points, while with scope you
may be doing exactly the opposite. I really love it when the two work together in a pano image and it's probably my
biggest frustration with panos when they don't.

Here is one very similar to your GC one where I think scope overwhelms composition.

Quote:

---

Well...(and that is a very nice pano) it is getting down to honing the details....at least for me. I will not shoot a pano unless I can forsee the composition as well.....it takes more time....and a LOT more thought....but seeing the diffrence it makes in the end result....the comments I get when it all comes together.....it makes it worth the diffrence. And it makes my work an easier sell over those who dont take composition as seriously.

And there IS a composition in every shot.....even one with more details.

That is MY challenge to anyone comfortable where they are shooting panos. :~)

Roman

---

Roman,

Again I agree. In fact I think that is a challenge for all types of photography and is what makes the difference between a good image and an outstanding image.

For me the purpose of taking panos is not primarily to produce beautiful landscapes for sale. I guess most of my pano work is really my attempt to capture the scope of a place I visit and allow me to re-experience it in the image. The pano in the OP of this thread was really taken to record the scope and dare I say grandeur of the Sonora pass. I know there are better compositions within the image, but they would focus down on compositional elements and the scope would be lost. I guess that's what I was trying to get at about scope often working against composition. As with all photography, the image is always guided by the purpose for which it is intended. Certainly if I was going for landscape composition this image would be more of what I would have been after.