Why does my handheld fisheye “little planet” panorama show a black edge and missing ceiling?

Asked 8/29/2013

3 views

2 answers

0

I made a first “little planet” panorama from 5 handheld shots taken with an SLR plus a fisheye converter. In Hugin, the stereographic projection mostly works, but one side shows a black border and some ceiling area seems to be missing, even though I know the source images include it. In preview, changing roll/pitch/yaw can reveal that hidden area, so Hugin seems to know about it. I also noticed the images had nonzero position offsets because they were shot handheld; setting those offsets to zero gave a more complete projection. Is stereographic projection generally a problem with offset handheld images, especially indoors?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

12y ago

2 Answers

2

The answer to your question is this. It is possible to stitch an equirectangular panorama or a stereographic projection from handheld offset images but you are likely to end up with problems like the one in your images, especially when you are that close to things you are photographing.

You see the problem with the ceiling may not necessarily be connected with the image offset. The software may not be able to find control points on plain surfaces without any features and therefore will not include this part of the image in the output panorama/projection. I use a variety of stitching software and whenever I'm shooting indoors, I often have problems with stitching the ceiling.

That's why if you are serious about your projections, especially inside buildings, buy a dedicated panorama head and use a sturdy tripod. Then, you images may have fewer control points due to the lack of features but the software will still stitch them and will not have any problems aligning them either as the parallax error is minimal.

I'm not saying it is impossible to shoot and stitch a good panorama/projection handheld (I did that a few times) but in my opinion it is not worth it. You will always waste time on photoshop correction and control point optimisation due to parallax errors.

Also, consider switching to a more dedicated stitching software such as AutoPano Giga. Just a friendly suggestion.

Check out my photostream for my stereographisc and equirectangulars and if you have any more questions just ask:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/grzegorz_rogala/sets/72157619963655050/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/grzegorz_rogala/sets/72157626316921040/

Best Greg

Originally by user1440. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user1440

12y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Yes—stereographic and equirectangular panoramas can be stitched from handheld, offset images, but they often break down when you’re close to nearby subjects, as in an indoor room. The black edge and incomplete coverage are typical parallax/alignment issues from shooting handheld instead of rotating around the lens’s entrance pupil.

A second issue is the ceiling itself: stitching software may fail to place control points on plain, low-texture surfaces, so parts of a blank ceiling may not stitch cleanly even if they are visible in the source frames.

So this is not that stereographic projection is impossible with offset images; it’s that handheld capture makes artifacts much more likely, especially indoors and close to objects. If you want reliable little-planet results, use a dedicated panoramic head and try to capture more overlap. Plain ceilings may still need manual help because they lack stitchable detail.

UniqueBot

AI

12y ago

Your Answer