Post by: Xairbusdriver on July 08, 2014, 03:54:31 PM
Post by: kimmer on July 09, 2014, 12:40:12 PM
Post by: Paddy on July 09, 2014, 01:48:39 PM
https://forums.adobe.com/message/5891597#5891597
More details (for Photoshop/Lightroom users, though I suspect that PSE may work as well) http://photographylife.com/how-to-create-a...ma-in-lightroom
Post by: Xairbusdriver on July 09, 2014, 02:12:50 PM
QUOTE
Don't know why this has to be a secret requiring a subscription
Well, EXCUUUUUSE ME! 
I wasn't aware that it was any kind of "secret". The site I linked to is simply a place for Elements users and/or subscribers to their excellent printed (remember those?)(or downloadable PDF) magazine. That's why the stitching app was Elements.
I suggested that probably any graphics app with that 'pano stitching' capability would be an easy/simple substitute.The fact that this technique is in other places on the web is not unusual, in my humble opinion. However, I wasn't aware of it so I published the link here because I know there are some who use Lightroom. I don't even own/use Lightroom, so this technique is not something I can use, which may also explain why I didn't know it was "all over the place". I've also heard the 'news' about Aperture being at the end of its life, so many might be considering Lightroom.
I've simply used Elements alone for making panos but not with RAW images. The technique doesn't really need Lightroom. All you need to do is downsize an image in just about any format (jpeg is fine) to make a trial pano. If it looks great, make the next, real pano with the RAW images. It will simply take much, much longer.
The whole point of using Lightroom was to use its "Preset" creation capabilities. Aperture doesn't have that, as far as I know. Then, again, one could probably create something in Automator to do the file size shrinking and even starting up Elements...
I suppose a text description ("Cheat Sheet") would be a waste of bytes, since "it's all over the place" as a link/video/blog/etc. But I'm happy to send the text as a PM to any who are interested. One will be on the way as soon as I finish this post.
Post by: Paddy on July 09, 2014, 04:55:09 PM
QUOTE(Xairbusdriver @ Jul 9 2014, 03:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE
Don't know why this has to be a secret requiring a subscription
Well, EXCUUUUUSE ME! I wasn't aware that it was any kind of "secret". The site I linked to is simply a place for Elements users and/or subscribers to their excellent printed (remember those?)(or downloadable PDF) magazine. That's why the stitching app was Elements.
I suggested that probably any graphics app with that 'pano stitching' capability would be an easy/simple substitute.The fact that this technique is in other places on the web is not unusual, in my humble opinion. However, I wasn't aware of it so I published the link here because I know there are some who use Lightroom. I don't even own/use Lightroom, so this technique is not something I can use, which may also explain why I didn't know it was "all over the place". I've also heard the 'news' about Aperture being at the end of its life, so many might be considering Lightroom.
I've simply used Elements alone for making panos but not with RAW images. The technique doesn't really need Lightroom. All you need to do is downsize an image in just about any format (jpeg is fine) to make a trial pano. If it looks great, make the next, real pano with the RAW images. It will simply take much, much longer.
The whole point of using Lightroom was to use its "Preset" creation capabilities. Aperture doesn't have that, as far as I know. Then, again, one could probably create something in Automator to do the file size shrinking and even starting up Elements...
I suppose a text description ("Cheat Sheet") would be a waste of bytes, since "it's all over the place" as a link/video/blog/etc. But I'm happy to send the text as a PM to any who are interested. One will be on the way as soon as I finish this post.
No need to get your knickers in a twist, Jim.
It wasn't YOU I was complaining about, but the fact that a fairly well-known technique (or so it would appear - having not really needed it, I hadn't used it and wasn't aware of it) requires a subscription to see - on that site. Unfortunately, paying for information these days is often a bit of a mug's game, as it's often available for free somewhere online. Of course, one does need the usual filters...just because it's online, doesn't mean it's accurate/true, though in this case, I think we don't have to worry about the miracle cure aspect. One also needs to be a capable searcher - not everyone is, which leaves a place for those who want someone else to aggregate the info for them and I suppose, paid subscriptions. It's a tough one, that issue -one that news outlets of all types are wrestling with. Putting info online - writing articles, doing videos etc. takes work. Sometimes ridiculous amounts of it - and it's hard to get compensated adequately these days.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on July 09, 2014, 06:53:29 PM
QUOTE(Paddy @ Jul 9 2014, 04:55 PM)
it's hard to get compensated adequately these days.
I have certainly noticed that since I retired... Everyone seems to think I'm willing to work for free now!! 
"That site" has several very good, short and well done vids, often tied in with a recent article. I'm happy with my 'investment'.
I find it convenient to get an email notification about a video or downloadable files about the magazine without even a hit of ads or a 'other stuff you may be interested in' garbage all over the page. And the comments are on topic, often helpful and, like TS, polite! 
Post by: jcarter on July 11, 2014, 11:33:42 AM
Thanks for the links and goodies.