Question regarding 360 deg pano

[lilewis]

Once we have the drone/camera pointed in the direction we want to start shooting a 360, when we press the shutter button does the camera software select horizon level on the first shot, or does it just start at the level where the camera is set to by the operator? The reason I'm asking is because I cannot understand why the grey blob at the top of the sky appears (link below), and I'm thinking this may have happened because I didn't have the camera aimed high enough so the in-drone software added what it thought should be there? I don't remember exactly what the attitude I had the gimble, and I prefer to get a straight answer here than to lose a lot of time experimenting.

Maybe I should have set the gimble to it's uppermost level?

All 26 shots on the memory card seem ok to me.

In other words, I can't tell if this is operator error or if my M2P has a problem.
Valley Fall Rd DJI_0531

 

[ff22]

I'd like to see an answer, too.

Here's mine from last week.

Spherical org_b726f7ed76c346b6_1552097774000.

I also see a bit of what I'd call "fill in" blue sky but it is more blended in mine than yours. Your Tiny Planet is also a bit "bumpy"

I was not all that high when I shot mine. How high were you?

 

[lilewis]

FF22. I see it on yours also but much less noticeable and only in a local spot.
I don't remember the height but it was probably 300+/- ft. I'm also not certain that I had the camera set to it's highest position when I started shooting the pano, as I usually set the horizon where I want it instead for normal single shot photography - and maybe that's the cause of the blur on the top.

What I don't get is, since the process is all automated, I assume that after shooting first photo on the top row, the balance of the top row shots would be taken at exactly the same level. If it did that, there should be no need to add any kind 'filling in'.

While writing this, I though of something else: the message on the display when starting the 360 cautions not to move during the process. I don't see how - but could even a small controller movement cause a slight mis-alignment of the top row creating the need for the software to fill it in?

It's been too windy here to test again the last couple of days.

 

[ff22]

Talk about a HOLE - check this one out:

PANO0001 Panorama--3.

I don't recall what happened - it was an early one.

 

[brett8883]

The camera cannot look straight up so you won’t have a complete 360 pano it’s not possible.

However, with good a post processor like photoshop just be sure to check “context aware fill” and it will fill in the sky for you when it stitched the frames together and it’s scary good at it

 

[lilewis]

Talk about a HOLE - check this one out:

PANO0001 Panorama--3.

I don't recall what happened - it was an early one.

I saw that one when scanning through Kuula to see if any others had the issue.

 

[lilewis]

Another test with the same issue: Doesn't look as bad because the sky is mostly the same color throughout the 360 sphere pano, but the issue is still there. I took this standing perfectly still with the camera aimed at max height (but not at the extreme height) setting.

I guess my two questions are: is this normal and the best the MP2 can offer? And does anyone have any suggestions to avoid the software creating a false sky? Henry Park Sky test DJI_0541.

One last thought: image size is set to 3:2 - should it be re-set to 16:9?

 

[ff22]

Another test with the same issue: Doesn't look as bad because the sky is mostly the same color throughout the 360 sphere pano, but the issue is still there. I took this standing perfectly still with the camera aimed at max height (but not at the extreme height) setting.

I guess my two questions are: is this normal and the best the MP2 can offer? And does anyone have any suggestions to avoid the software creating a false sky? Henry Park Sky test DJI_0541.

One last thought: image size is set to 3:2 - should it be re-set to 16:9?

Well, I think that Brett8883 posted why this occurs. The drone can look straight down which accounts for everything below working well. It can probably not be avoided but as he also suggested, it can be worked around with other software. Obviously, the drone's internal handling does the best it can and how well it is camouflaged depends on the sky.

There may be a way to get more sky, although I'm not sure how well it would work or even if the drone can take advantage. I think there's a gimbal setting that allows it to crank further upward but I think it then might include the front props showing. And again, the drone might not angle the camera up that far if there's some presets on how it shows all the images.

I've not looked at image size and don't know if that changes anything or, again, if the drone uses presets for 360 and other pans.

 

[brett8883]

Another test with the same issue: Doesn't look as bad because the sky is mostly the same color throughout the 360 sphere pano, but the issue is still there. I took this standing perfectly still with the camera aimed at max height (but not at the extreme height) setting.

I guess my two questions are: is this normal and the best the MP2 can offer? And does anyone have any suggestions to avoid the software creating a false sky? Henry Park Sky test DJI_0541.

One last thought: image size is set to 3:2 - should it be re-set to 16:9?

I’m pretty sure it will auto-switch back to 3:2 even if you have it on 16:9

So you don’t want it create a false sky or you do? It can’t look up more than 30 degrees so you are always gonna have some kind of hole or false sky. If you have a post processor do it with your raw files it’s gonna look better.

If you want you can send me the raw files and I’ll make one for you so you can see the difference and I guarantee you won’t even notice.

Make a google drive folder and upload the RAWs or something and I’ll take care of it

 

[lilewis]

I guess what I can't get my head around is why the software doesn't just use the shots as they are created by the camera and stop there? I'd be happy with that instead of having to PP. I did try to crop the 'defect' out before posting but it still added fluff when posting.

In any case thanks ff22 and Brett88833. I'm relieved that I did nothing wrong and there's nothing wrong with the drone.

Bret88833, the files are jpgs and I don't have google drive but I did put them into dropbox. I just send you a PM - but before you reply to the PM I've decided to try what you suggest. I'll let you know soon if my PS skills are adequate.

 

[brett8883]

I guess what I can't get my head around is why the software doesn't just use the shots as they are created by the camera and stop there? I'd be happy with that instead of having to PP. I did try to crop the 'defect' out before posting but it still added fluff when posting.

In any case thanks ff22 and Brett88833. I'm relieved that I did nothing wrong and there's nothing wrong with the drone.

Bret88833, the files are jpgs and I don't have google drive but I did put them into dropbox. I just send you a PM - but before you reply to the PM I've decided to try what you suggest. I'll let you know soon if my PS skills are adequate.

That’ll work! Just sent you my email. I’m about to go fly for a little bit but you could send em anyway and we can compare if you’d like. You guys have inspired me to go out and shoot some 360 panos which I haven’t done in a long time!

 

[lilewis]

Sent! I just processed thru PS. File, automate, merge, spherical, content aware, and got a roller coaster looking final image after about 30 min.. Uploaded to Kuula and ended up with basically the same image as I originally stressed over. Maybe I missed a step.

Have fun flying. It's dark here in Ct now. No rush for your attempt to fix my photo. And if it's any problem at all, don't worry about it. My biggest worry was that I was doing something wrong in the drone settings, or that I might have to send it back to DJI for a repair.

 

[brett8883]

Sent! I just processed thru PS. File, automate, merge, spherical, content aware, and got a roller coaster looking final image after about 30 min.. Uploaded to Kuula and ended up with basically the same image as I originally stressed over. Maybe I missed a step.

Have fun flying. It's dark here in Ct now. No rush for your attempt to fix my photo. And if it's any problem at all, don't worry about it. My biggest worry was that I was doing something wrong in the drone settings, or that I might have to send it back to DJI for a repair.

Sent! I just processed thru PS. File, automate, merge, spherical, content aware, and got a roller coaster looking final image after about 30 min.. Uploaded to Kuula and ended up with basically the same image as I originally stressed over. Maybe I missed a step.

Have fun flying. It's dark here in Ct now. No rush for your attempt to fix my photo. And if it's any problem at all, don't worry about it. My biggest worry was that I was doing something wrong in the drone settings, or that I might have to send it back to DJI for a repair.

I’m working on your pano and I see what you are talking about now. Photoshop seems to think there are missing pieces. When you downloaded these from your SD card were there any files like a pano.xml file anything like that?

 

[lilewis]

I’m working on your pano and I see what you are talking about now. Photoshop seems to think there are missing pieces. When you downloaded these from your SD card were there any files like a pano.xml file anything like that?[/QUOTE]

Yes I think I remember seeing a third directory on the card with one unusual file name. I usually transfer both the media and panorama directories from the memory card to the computer before working with them, but I have not been transferring the one in the 3rd (misc?) directory. If that's an important file for proper processing, how do I incorporate it into the PS process? If the wind lets up today I'll make another attempt and keep the 3rd (misc?) directory, because the previous ones are all gone now.

 

[brett8883]

I think it would be in the regular directory with all the media. I thought I remembered there being pano.xml files or something like that and maybe those had information about how the files line up but I could be mistaken.

I tried taking my own 360s yesterday but I did them all in RAW and that was a major fail lol. Photoshop turned it into a 6 GB file and my computer couldn’t turn that into a 3D object.

You know I’m beginning to think I don’t know as much about these as I thought I did. Doing the post processing route was WAY more than it was worth.

I use to be able to do these fairly easily. I might have to play with it and try to relearn it cause it’s been awhile. Sorry I took you on a wild goose chase here.

 

[lilewis]

Don't be sorry. I'm certainly not, and I don't consider it a wild goose chase, and I really appreciate your input. It's all in the name of learning and continuous improvement... and I'm somewhat comforted to see that I'm not the only one who gets this result. (I see it on other's 360s on Kuula also). I also got the GB large file extension file but changed it to jpg which opened ok but wasn't recognized as a 360. It took my Win 10/I7 processor w 16bg ram, and video card w 8 gb ram 20+ min to process 26 jpgs, so I don't think I have the pc to process 26 RAWs.

I think it's time for me to test the other pano options and see if I like them better, although even with the manufactured skies, 360s are still pretty cool.

 

[ff22]

Don't be sorry. I'm certainly not, and I don't consider it a wild goose chase, and I really appreciate your input. It's all in the name of learning and continuous improvement... and I'm somewhat comforted to see that I'm not the only one who gets this result. (I see it on other's 360s on Kuula also). I also got the GB large file extension file but changed it to jpg which opened ok but wasn't recognized as a 360. It took my Win 10/I7 processor w 16bg ram, and video card w 8 gb ram 20+ min to process 26 jpgs, so I don't think I have the pc to process 26 RAWs.

I think it's time for me to test the other pano options and see if I like them better, although even with the manufactured skies, 360s are still pretty cool.

The 360 or Tiny Planet pans are definitely really neat. The "flat" version obviously shows lots of distortions. Actually, the Horizontal Pan also shows quite a bit of distortion - I don't recall how many images it compiles but I think it stitches more than one row of images. Doing a manual one might be something to try. The Vertical is more mundane. HyperResolution is kind of neat but I think only the Zoom does that one.

 

[lilewis]

The 360 or Tiny Planet pans are definitely really neat. The "flat" version obviously shows lots of distortions. Actually, the Horizontal Pan also shows quite a bit of distortion - I don't recall how many images it compiles but I think it stitches more than one row of images. Doing a manual one might be something to try. The Vertical is more mundane. HyperResolution is kind of neat but I think only the Zoom does that one.

 

[lilewis]

ff22, Thanks again for your input. When the weather is more forgiving here, I plan to experiment with all the options.

 

[Nine-Oh]

Because the drone cannot look straight up, you should land, take the drone in your hands and point it a the sky an take a few shots to finish it. Then take the raw panorama pictures, add your sky photos and throw that into a panorama maker like ICE. The pictures will be adjusted and scaled and you will have your full 360x180.