Anyone use PT GUI?

[Jools Elliott]

SSIA really.

 

Why? I have Photoshop CS2 and Elements 8 if memory serves. Neither seems to be doing a decent job lately of stitching panos which is very frustrating.

 

Was wondering if others have experience of PT GUI and how it fares. Which version you are using would also be interesting to hear about:)

[Callie]

yes use it whenever I do a panorama, I don't shoot loads but when I do I really appreciate ptgui, it is a massive improvement on photoshop for stitching panoramas. I use the pro version which I bought because of the ability of selecting and masking on the overlap between images, it has been really useful to be able to do this quite a few times, so I would say its worth it.

[dustydingo]

I'm very happy with CS5's pano stitching. Is there really any advantage forking out for PT GUI?

 

dd

[Jools Elliott]

I've downloaded it and given it a try. 10 times quicker than PS!

 

After multiple crashes with Elements and it's also somehow lost the layer masks when doing the final stitch I'd had enough.

 

I do need to look at PS again as it does need an upgrade. One thing I thought about doing was ordering it from Amazon in the USA for a cheaper price. So, changing the topic a little has anyone purchased a copy from overseas and successfully registered it?

[dustydingo]

Be interested in a comparison to CS5 -- I think PS has come a long way since CS2, though not sure how CS5's pano capability compares with Elements.

 

dd

[Jools Elliott]

So far dusty it looks pretty damn good! Go have a look at the section on discussing images for one I did with PT GUI.

[MDM]

I've downloaded it and given it a try. 10 times quicker than PS!

 

After multiple crashes with Elements and it's also somehow lost the layer masks when doing the final stitch I'd had enough.

 

I do need to look at PS again as it does need an upgrade. One thing I thought about doing was ordering it from Amazon in the USA for a cheaper price. So, changing the topic a little has anyone purchased a copy from overseas and successfully registered it?

PSCS5 brought the ability to use much larger amounts of RAM than earlier versions (Mac at least, not sure about PC) which makes a massive difference in speed when working with large images (assuming you have enough RAM to cope). Stitching is way faster than earlier versions. You can use the layer masks in PS to modify the automated stitch if so inclined. PSCS6 has very superior graphics engine to previous versions. Massive improvements over CS2. I don't know about CC - not gone onto the subscription thing (yet).

 

As far as I know, you can't buy a version of PS and register or activate it outside of the territory where you live. Adobe has this stitched up tight for many years now.

[Jools Elliott]

Damn. I thought they might have done something like that:( My mum lives over in Florida so I was hoping to get through that channel. Guess that is a non-starter!!!

[dustydingo]

 

I've downloaded it and given it a try. 10 times quicker than PS!

 

After multiple crashes with Elements and it's also somehow lost the layer masks when doing the final stitch I'd had enough.

 

I do need to look at PS again as it does need an upgrade. One thing I thought about doing was ordering it from Amazon in the USA for a cheaper price. So, changing the topic a little has anyone purchased a copy from overseas and successfully registered it?

PSCS5 brought the ability to use much larger amounts of RAM than earlier versions (Mac at least, not sure about PC) which makes a massive difference in speed when working with large images (assuming you have enough RAM to cope). Stitching is way faster than earlier versions. You can use the layer masks in PS to modify the automated stitch if so inclined. PSCS6 has very superior graphics engine to previous versions. Massive improvements over CS2. I don't know about CC - not gone onto the subscription thing (yet).

 

As far as I know, you can't buy a version of PS and register or activate it outside of the territory where you live. Adobe has this stitched up tight for many years now.

 

I've most recently had perfect results using CS5 to construct a 91 image (hand-held), multi-horizontal-layer pano, with as you say full control via layer masks to modify (unnecessary I might add) the stitching, hence wondering if there is really any great advantage to moving to PT GUI. The processing didn't seem too long (can't remember how long mind you, but it didn't feel 'bad') and the result was fantastic. I may download the trial version if there is, but not bothered if there's no real advantage.

 

dd

[Callie]

Its a while since I processed a pano, but I did coincidentally shoot one yesterday. I have always preferred ptgui for processing in the past and I do have PSCS5 - but I will try yesterdays shoot in both and see how it goes, will report back!

[dustydingo]

Its a while since I processed a pano, but I did coincidentally shoot one yesterday. I have always preferred ptgui for processing in the past and I do have PSCS5 - but I will try yesterdays shoot in both and see how it goes, will report back!

Brilliant Callie, thank you.

 

dd

[MDM]

I have considered checking out other programs as I do a lot of panoramas but I spend enough time already just doing them in PS that I don't really want to try new stuff unless there is a real advantage. Especially since I started using a D800, it can be very time-consuming - selecting a bunch of images in Lightroom, making initial adjustments and opening the images takes the most time. I open the images and just let PS do its thing while I do something else. My Mac is getting a little old now and some of the RAM died a while ago but it can still do a 7 or 8 image pano of D800 images with its remaining 10 Gb in reasonable time.

[NielsVK]

I used to used it, I found it very good and intuitive and got good results. Especially the way one can fine-tune matching points in adjoining images. I have a few stitched images on Alamy (less than 10) and only one of them has sold, and that one doesn't even look like a panorama: C0TH56.

 

Haven't used it since I switched to Mac a few years ago, although there is a Mac version I believe. Also my current cameras (Sony NEX) do a pretty good job auto-stitching in-camera.

[Callie]

I did try this morning processing the same pano in PTGUi and PS5. This was a small pano, just 6 images (canon 5dII, RAW files processed and saved as tiffs) and a very simple one to stitch with no close elements in the images.

 

PTGUi is for a start much faster - 12 seconds compared to photoshops 176 seconds.

For the final results - I am going with the version created in PTGUi simply because I didn't like one of the blends produced by photoshop. OK I could process it to correct it, but PTGUi did a perfect job here.

Where I do prefer PTGUi over photoshop, usually it can be done in PS but in a far more labour and time consuming way -

- the ability to fine tune the control points of the overlapping images. On a simple pano like the one I just processed with no close elements it shouldn't be necessary anyway, likewise if you use a panoramic tripod head, but this has saved me a number of times in the past.

- being able to change the projection type after the images have been stitched. Leaving photoshop on auto, you are probably going to get satisfactory results, but if you wanted to change, it looks to me like you would need to start again. With PTGUi it works on auto but you can change the method used and see the results instantly. Also it has more options than PS - one I like is Verdutismo (see page here http://www.ptgui.com/man/projections.html)

- PTGUi is easier to manipulate the distortion of a stitch and very simple to set vertical points. 

 

I did purchase PTGUi pro at a time when I was doing a lot more pano work than I do now. Then I really appreciated the time saving and extra functions which make stitching panos so much simpler and at times neater than PS. But, if I was only producing the occasional pano I would just give PS a go and put up with the extra work and time involved - for now though I am pleased I don't have to!

[MDM]

Callie - thanks for posting that. Very interesting. What computer/OS are you using and how much RAM have you got?

[Callie]

MDM - very out of date there and it does slow things down! Dell / Windows 7 6GB RAM

[dustydingo]

I did try this morning processing the same pano in PTGUi and PS5. This was a small pano, just 6 images (canon 5dII, RAW files processed and saved as tiffs) and a very simple one to stitch with no close elements in the images.

 

PTGUi is for a start much faster - 12 seconds compared to photoshops 176 seconds.

For the final results - I am going with the version created in PTGUi simply because I didn't like one of the blends produced by photoshop. OK I could process it to correct it, but PTGUi did a perfect job here.

Where I do prefer PTGUi over photoshop, usually it can be done in PS but in a far more labour and time consuming way -

- the ability to fine tune the control points of the overlapping images. On a simple pano like the one I just processed with no close elements it shouldn't be necessary anyway, likewise if you use a panoramic tripod head, but this has saved me a number of times in the past.

- being able to change the projection type after the images have been stitched. Leaving photoshop on auto, you are probably going to get satisfactory results, but if you wanted to change, it looks to me like you would need to start again. With PTGUi it works on auto but you can change the method used and see the results instantly. Also it has more options than PS - one I like is Verdutismo (see page here http://www.ptgui.com/man/projections.html)

- PTGUi is easier to manipulate the distortion of a stitch and very simple to set vertical points. 

 

I did purchase PTGUi pro at a time when I was doing a lot more pano work than I do now. Then I really appreciated the time saving and extra functions which make stitching panos so much simpler and at times neater than PS. But, if I was only producing the occasional pano I would just give PS a go and put up with the extra work and time involved - for now though I am pleased I don't have to!

 

Thank you Callie. I do very complicated panos, especially portraits with multiple horizontal "rows". I alway hand-hold too. From the sounds of it, PT GUI might be more accurate, or at least more able to be corrected . . . the capacity to see the different pano methods instantly is cool, though I guess the actual processing of a different method may require re-processing . . . still, at those speeds, who cares? (I never use Auto on PS, the set up of each shoot dictates clearly which method should be used better than any piece of software can "choose"). I think I can feel a small project for the weekend coming on . . .

 

dd

[Callie]

DD yes I think if you are hand holding it would be even more valuable to you. I do always use a tripod, but not with a pano head, I just take care not to include anything too close to the camera!

In addition to the above, I realised after posting that PTGUi does some processing in the final save, so in addition to the time to stitch what is basically a preview, it took just under 20 seconds to final process, blend and save the finished image. Still quicker than photoshop!

The only times I have had the do the initial re-alignment again is when adding extra control points. In the image I just did I added two extra to set a vertical (add two control points on the same image). After that it is necessary to hit the re-align button again, but still it is even quicker than the first time, just a few seconds!

[MDM]

MDM - very out of date there and it does slow things down! Dell / Windows 7 6GB RAM

 

That is not a lot of RAM so probably makes quite a bit of difference in terms of speed. I'm out of touch with Windows versions but you need to be using a 64-bit (OS) to get the benefit of the massive speed enhancements which came when Adobe made Photoshop 64-bit in CS5 (for Mac at least). Photoshop is a bit of a beast in its RAM requirements but in older non-64-bit OS can only use less than 2Gb of RAM irrespective of how much is on machine.

[Callie]

I'm not too up on hardware MDM, but I can tell a difference when I use a friends PC! Maybe time to invest in new soon. Current is 64 bit OS though.

[MDM]

Panorama processing has to be one of the most hardware-hungry processes there is - also 8-bit or 16-bit choice which makes a big difference in processing time. I used to do them all as 16-bit when using a D700 but I usually do them as 8-bit now with the D800 for anything more than 2 or 3 files or they take ages. I'm reluctant to introduce anything new into my workflow as I don't want to spend any more time than I already do on panoramas, as PS can do most of what I want. But it's interesting to find out about other options.

[Callie]

I do process mine 16 bit mostly, fine in ptgui for workflow but it does make a noticeable difference on saving if a lot of images are involved. If I do work on a very large one, say 20 images, I then use 8 bit.