HDR-Pano with vignette correction

[bienewald-dresden]

Lightroom Version Number

10.1

Operating System

1. Windows 10

Hi all, I'm new here and would like to ask a question. If I use the Laowa 9/2,8 for single images I want to put together as a HDR-Panorama later, I've to correct the vignettes. I do this in LR Classic and sync with all the images via Effects-Vignetting. But I have the feeling, LR doesn't take those corrections, when I merge the images to a panorama. If I export the corrected images as tif files, re-import them and than merge the panorama, it looks much better. Am I doing something wrong or is it just not working?
Thanks a lot for a hint and best regards from Dresden in Germany, Frank

 

[Johan Elzenga]

When merging images, Lightroom ignores most of the edits you made. Effects - Vignetting is one of the edits that gets ignored. One of the few things that is taken into account is a lens profile, but I do not know if Lightroom has a profile for this lens.

 

[clee01l]

When merging images, Lightroom ignores most of the edits you made. Effects - Vignetting is one of the edits that gets ignored. One of the few things that is taken into account is a lens profile, but I do not know if Lightroom has a profile for this lens.

I doubt that Adobe has a lens profile for any Laowa lens. A 9mm lens is going to have a lot of distortion On the Laowa web site, I see that have a Laowa 9mm/f5.6 rectiliner lens and offer a Lens profile for download. I don’t see any information on a Laowa 9mm/f2.8 lens.
IMO a wide angle (fisheye) lens is not suitable for building a panorama. And if you want to create on, you first meet to correct the distortion and save those intermediate files before putting them through the panorama process.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[bienewald-dresden]

Hi there, thanks for dealing with my problem! The lens is not a fisheye, it's the Laowa C-Dreamer 9mm/f2,8 for Aps-C and pretty well corrected. If LR ignores most of the changes at merging, the way to save them, would be to export tif's with the changes and merge them instead. That's, what already works for me, it just feels a bit awkward.
Thanks again and have a great day, best regards, Frank

 

[Johan Elzenga]

Hi there, thanks for dealing with my problem! The lens is not a fisheye, it's the Laowa C-Dreamer 9mm/f2,8 for Aps-C and pretty well corrected. If LR ignores most of the changes at merging, the way to save them, would be to export tif's with the changes and merge them instead. That's, what already works for me, it just feels a bit awkward.
Thanks again and have a great day, best regards, Frank

What you could try is if the manual settings of the Lens Corrections panel are perhaps taken into account. You can remove vignetting there too (and this is a better place anyway, because Effects - Vignetting works post crop). Quite frankly I doubt that the manual settings are indeed taken into account, but it's worth a try.

 

[bienewald-dresden]

Thanks for the suggestion, but it doesn't work either. But anyway, at least I learned about the difference of those two methods of removing the vignettes. Helpful to know, thanks!

 

[clee01l]

The lens is not a fisheye, it's the Laowa C-Dreamer 9mm/f2,8 for Aps-C and pretty well corrected.

A 9mm APS-C lens corresponds to ~14mm for full frame which classifies it as a super wide angle lens or fisheye (Fisheye lens - Wikipedia)
These super wide angle lenses need to be corrected for distortion when processed. Either with a lens profile or manually. Lightroom does not do any of these corrections before Panorama processing. So, I think you need to process each image individually and Panorame merge the derivatives


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Johan Elzenga]

Clee, a 14mm on full frame is not necessarily a fisheye. That depends on whether or not the manufacturer decided to correct the distortion or not. Canon has a 11-24mm super wide angle zoom lens that is still not a fisheye at 11mm. I have a Sony 12-24mm that is also not a fisheye at its shortest focal length.

 

[clee01l]

Clee, a 14mm on full frame is not necessarily a fisheye. That depends on whether or not the manufacturer decided to correct the distortion or not. Canon has a 11-24mm super wide angle zoom lens that is still not a fisheye at 11mm. I have a Sony 12-24mm that is also not a fisheye at its shortest focal length.

I referenced the Wikipedia link on Fish Eye. I rented the Nikon 14-24 once and the 14mm was not suitable to use to construct a panorama without being corrected in processing. Normally a 9mm lens would be classed as a fisheye. Any lens with an angle of view between 100 and 180 degrees is considered a fisheye lens. This lens according to Venus Lens has a FOV of 113˚.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Johan Elzenga]

I referenced the Wikipedia link on Fish Eye. I rented the Nikon 14-24 once and the 14mm was not suitable to use to construct a panorama without being corrected in processing. Normally a 9mm lens would be classed as a fisheye. Any lens with an angle of view between 100 and 180 degrees is considered a fisheye lens. This lens according to Venus Lens has a FOV of 113˚.

The link you referenced clearly states in the very first sentence that a fisheye lens is a lens that produces strong visual distortion. A fisheye lens gives images a characteristic convex non-rectilinear appearance. That does not necessarily apply to all super wide angle lenses.

 

[clee01l]

The link you referenced clearly states in the very first sentence that a fisheye lens is a lens that produces strong visual distortion. A fisheye lens gives images a characteristic convex non-rectilinear appearance. That does not necessarily apply to all super wide angle lenses.

Please read a little deeper. “The angle of view of a fisheye lens is usually between 100 and 180 degrees”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Johan Elzenga]

Please read a little deeper. “The angle of view of a fisheye lens is usually between 100 and 180 degrees”

Every cow is an animal, but not every animal is a cow. Yes, every fisheye lens is an ultra wide angle lens, but not every ultra wide angle lens is a fisheye lens. The Lowa 9mm/2.8 is not a fisheye lens, period. “As a Zero-D lens, this 9mm f/2.8's optical design is specifically meant to limit distortion for clear and accurate portrayals of landscapes and architectural subjects. Rectilinear design renders subjects with minimal distortion in order to suit landscape and architectural applications.” (Venus Optics Laowa 9mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Fujifilm X)

 

[clee01l]

Every cow is an animal, but not every animal is a cow. Yes, every fisheye lens is an ultra wide angle lens, but not every ultra wide angle lens is a fisheye lens. The Lowa 9mm/2.8 is not a fisheye lens, period. “As a Zero-D lens, this 9mm f/2.8's optical design is specifically meant to limit distortion for clear and accurate portrayals of landscapes and architectural subjects. Rectilinear design renders subjects with minimal distortion in order to suit landscape and architectural applications.” (Venus Optics Laowa 9mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Fujifilm X)

So are you trying to say that the lens corrects for the distortion before the image hits the sensor?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Johan Elzenga]

So are you trying to say that the lens corrects for the distortion before the image hits the sensor?

Basically, yes. The optical lens design of the Iowa is such that this lens produces a rectilinear image. Straight lines remain straight, so the image looks ‘normal’ and can even be used for architecture photography. A lens profile may still be used for the finishing touch and correction of vignetting, but that profile would not make more drastic corrections than a profile for a standard lens does.

A fisheye is deliberately not corrected like this. The result is this typical non-rectilinear fisheye image with curved lines. Sometimes the image is even circular, but there are also full frame fisheye lenses. See the examples on the Wikipedia page you linked to.