Something you have obviously mastered already! I'm still struggling with the technique - trying to find an appropriate balance between efficiency and quality. Overexposed trim elements are the lesser of two evils for me but they are still evil! The trouble I am running into now is finding a way to ease the transition (quickly) between the two drastically different scenes. That's why I still usually take the extra step of combining the best HDR blend once again with the best exterior exposure to come up with something that is less technically correct yet more pleasing to my eye. When you absolutely have to have that balanced exterior view you need to push PhotoMatix very hard toward the dark end of the blend - which invariably produces dark window trim elements and an overall underexposed look to the interior altogether. I find this is where the limits of PhotoMatix really start to show. Mainly because of the very successful support of the GPU and the improvements in HDR updating to version 10 makes sense, but it also has a pretty good price tag.Same here David. At least you can delete it and HTML5 only is used. I beleive that if you are doing panoramas seriously you problay solved this problem or upload the resulting files to your webspace to check out the images.Ĭoncerning the massive security issue arround Adobe flash it would have been nice to have an option in the dialog not to generate a flash file. PTGui 10 comes with its own, standalone viewer for spherical panoramas. Looking at the enfuse method there are no differences:īut tonemapping a panorama with default settings turns out in a much more pleasing and natural image. HDR PanoramaĪccording to the manufacturer the HDR function was improved too.
That is not that big difference, probably due to the fact that my notebook offers 8 GB RAM only.īut the difference in speed comparing PTGui 9 and PTGui 10 is enormous, and now you probably wish that Lightroom 6 did get the same performance gain by introducing GPU support. For the multiple panorama PTGui 9 needed 5:27 min and PTGui 10 2:07 min. I couldn’t believe this result and did the comparism a couple of times, but results where within a range of 1-2 sec. But for the final result PTGui 9 needed 2:10 min. For the sphere panorama PTGui 9 neeeded 28 sec. I measured the time to generate a preview and the final panorama. I did a sphere panorama with 16 base images and a multiple row panorama consisting of almost 170 base images.
I did a comparism with my notebook which is equipped with a NVidia GT650 and 4 GB VRAM. While the changes in the GUI are barely noticeable, changes in the stitcher with the support of the GPU are indeed massive. At first sight this sounds like a lot of advertisement and if you experienced the introduction for GPU support in Lightroom 6 you probably reduce your expectations. They claim an up to 7 times faster stitching depending on the panorama. PTGui promotes a tremendous increase in stitching speed by using the GPU on their website. The differences between the two version are listed here . The regular version is sold for 80,– € while the Pro version, which includes the necessary viewpoint correction and the ability to stitch HDR panoramas, sells for 149,– €, which is not cheap.
PTGUI PRO VS REGULAR MAC OS
PTGui is available in a regular and pro version and for Windows Mac OS systems. The final panorama is exported for web with Pano2VR and uploaded to my webspace.
PTGUI PRO VS REGULAR PATCH
Sometimes i use the patch tool in Pano2VR to vanish the tripod. The tripod is removed using the viewpoint correction in PTGui Pro and a additional nadir shot. My workflow starts with stitching the panorama in PTGui. I bought a panoramic head and started with sphere panoramas. Getting into PTGui started with using Hugin in the beginning with single row panorams. With the introduction of Pano2VR 5.0 it was time to check the latest versions of this combinbation I’m using the combibnation of PTGui and Pano2VR to stitch panorama images for quite a long time now, both for single/multiple row and sphere panoramas.