I have finally taken the plunge and tried out an in the round photo, and would like to share the results with this group, as you all are a chief source of inspiration for the idea. The first photo was the first try, and the second is the second.
This is a flower arrangement on my college campus that I pass on the way to classes. This morning I went out and shot 53 photos around, then selected the best ones to create the composite. It took a little trial and error to get the blending and order correct, but I believe that the final result is worth sharing with you all.
Matthew, you did it! And beautifully at that! Great job. I LOVE this ITR photo. I'm not sure which I prefer because in the 2nd one, I appreciate the crispness and brightness of the floral subject in the center, but I love the background in the first one. No matter what you're right that your results were well worth sharing!
Thank you so much for your kind comment, Jennifer! I actually prefer the background in the second because I find the patch where the trees are absent on the left to be distracting in the first. What aspect of the background do you prefer in the first?
In the first one, I appreciate the repeating pattern of the trees/windows fading away from right to left. It successfully presents the feeling of smooth motion around a stationary attractive subject (the nearly perfect line of trees adds to the effect as well). While the central "disc" feels stationary, it builds on that sense of motion in the background. The trees in the second photo feel too chaotic - almost like that background circular motion is shakey instead of smooth. Like I said before, I do like the crispness of the flowers in the second one. There's a lot going on in this ITR, but you did fantastic editing/layering work.
Good job with this Matthew, you should be happy with the results.
One comment on blending. Although you indicate you took 53 photos it looks like only a few are actually contributing to the final image (perhaps 4 or 5?). If this is intentional, then that is great (as are the images), but I have seen so many cases where layers have become ineffectual due to the opacity of layers above.
I'd be interested to know how many layers are in the final images, and how far you shot around the Cannas (ie did you circle around or take many close to one spot).
I'm just pointing this out as I think the effect of opacity over multiple layers is not typically understood (or documented), and I had to learn myself by trial and error.
Here's a link with my own findings on the effect if interested, and you can find details on the process I personally take under the 'Ventosa ITR guides' should you want further information
https://www.alanbrownphotography.com/understanding-the-cumulative-effect...
Like I say, the images are great the way they are, I just want to ensure you have that understanding as opacity blending is a strange beast.
Although I took 53 images, I only ended up using 12 of them for the composite. The original amount were taken by going about 3/4 around the circle, and the 12 I used were all between the two below.
I ended up cutting down to twelve for two reasons. The primary reason was as you indicated the inefficiency of adding more beyond a certain number. From a secondary reasoning, I wanted to keep the background as covered by the trees as possible, and the images to either side of the two below had portions without trees that were hindering that goal, as in the first image of my main post.
Sounds good Matthew. Adding layers would certainly result in a loss of detail in the Cannas (unless masked to suit), at the benefit of a more blended background.
Keep doing what you are doing and continue to experiment/play around.