Panorama Photo

Details
Location:	Ossenisse (10 m)	by:	Mentor Depret
Area:	Netherlands	Date:	2017 09 17

We are on the dike, 3.6 km north of my previous pano 22515, looking over the northern part of the natural reserve: Platen van Hulst (Plates of Hulst) and the broad meander of Terneuzen. From this viewpoint the river Scheldt resembles a big lake.

Last year, 3 small perpendicular oriented dams were built to protect the mud flats from erosion due to ever increasing currents. This is the outer bend of the meander of Terneuzen and river dynamics cause constant erosion at this side. But tide difference (4.5m to 5.5 m) and currents have sharply increased last 50 years mainly because of ever increasing the dept of the river. The Scheldt river now is able to allow ships with a draft of 13.1 m at any tide. Only a few years ago this was 11.85 m and Flanders even wants to go to 14 m. If this is a good idea in the long run has yet to be seen...

Canon Eos M6 with EF-M 18-150 mm, 12 pics, 35 mm (56 mm KB, with pano crop about 70 mm KB), iso 160, f 8, 1/800, PTGuiPro, 30000x2927 27.9 MB jpeg, downsized 6480x500 1.4MB jpeg

You need to login to like or comment a panorama

Liked 13 times

Comments

Difficult light, of course, but I do like the shape.

2017/11/05 13:22 , Arne Rönsch

Interesting and informative, also the descrition. Unfortunately the middle is overexposed. I use different exposure times in such light cinditions.

2017/11/06 08:36 , Friedemann Dittrich

@Friedemann. Personally I don't feel this as a problem here because it illustrates the direct heavy reflection of sunlight well and besides water, there are no other details to be seen in this direction. Also the sun was already very low at the moment of shooting.

2017/11/06 13:00 , Mentor Depret

A beautiful panorama of the dike and the waterway. The in the sun glistening water surface is ok, but the sky and the clouds above it not. And in addition again interesting information about the dikes.
Mentor, why do you save the original panorama as a JPG? This is not a good base for scaling down.

2017/11/08 14:00 , Heinz Höra

thx Heinz, do you mean one obtains a meaningful better jpeg 500 px pano if it is downsized from a huge tiff file?

2017/11/08 15:10 , Mentor Depret

Mentor, the JPG file will be compressed during the save. If you then take this as a starting point for scaling, the result will be worse than if you had assumed a loss-free TIFF file.

2017/11/08 17:13 , Heinz Höra

Heinz, doesn't that depend on the saved quality of the original jpeg? If one saves the original jpeg at 100% quality (PTGui), I see that the file size is almost equal to the Tiff. But these are enormous files, sometimes several hundreds MB and I had already several crashes with that. Also I limit to a wide of 30000 px because my system seems to crash on wider panos no matter if it is jpeg or tiff.

I mostly save the jpeg's at 95-98% quality (PTGui) because after downsizing to 500 px the file size seems to be just below the max allowed at this site. When I downsize and convert to jpeg from a Tiff with preview (Apple), then I have to guess a quality percentage.
Your input is welcome!

2017/11/08 20:13 , Mentor Depret

Mentor, the TIFF files from PTGui are first very large, because an extra layer is used etc. By reducing to the background layer and cropping you get into the area of 200 MByte (8bit-TIFF). But if you have crashes (where?, in which program?), then that's no use. I have no crashes, but I do not want to give you advices, because I have often experienced that you (dt.: man, allgemein) cannot overlook the situation.

2017/11/10 21:58 , Heinz Höra

Another interesting impression from your area.
To the technical discussion: I always work with TIFF up to the final scaling and then only "save for web" as JPG from IrfanView. Even with 100% quality, JPG's only have 8 bit color depth, and any transformation can lead to banding in the sky. Cheers, Martin

2017/11/11 15:05 , Martin Kraus

thx Martin, this is really interesting to know!

2017/11/11 20:27 , Mentor Depret