• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / GFX 100 / Scanning 4×5 TMax 100 and stitching with PTGui

Scanning 4×5 TMax 100 and stitching with PTGui

November 29, 2021 JimK Leave a Comment

In the last post I showed you what happens when you use Lightroom to stitch two vertical orientation scans into one horizontal orientation one. Lightroom amps up the contrast and or the sharpening. In an attempt to get around that, I stitched the stacked images from the last post using PTGui 11.7 and 12.8.

The scanner:

As, before, I made three sets of images:

  1. Single stack
  2. Slid-shifted double stack
  3. Pixel shifted stack

I took great pains to make the processing of the pixel shifted and unshifted series as close as possible. I stacked each series with the same settings in Helicon Focus. I converted them to positives with the same settings and sharpening turned off. I used Lightroom’s panorama tool to stitch the two-view stacked images. I exported all three to Photoshop, where I doubled the size of the unshifted image in both directions using bilinear interpolation and scaled the stitched image to the same dimensions using the same interpolation algorithm. I brought them back into Lightroom as developed one of the images, then pasted those setting onto the other image.

PTGui 12.8, Bilinear interpolation

 

Some crops:

Stitched with PTGui 11.7, BIlinear interpolation

 

PTGui 12.8, Bilinear interpolation

 

No pixel shift

 

Pixel Shift

It looks like we picked up a bit of sharpening or contrast with PTGui, but it’s a heck of a lot better than what Lightroom did:

Lr Two-way stitch

 

Here’s another crop, this time at 100% magnification from the 20,000 pixel wide images.

Stitched with PTGui 11.7, Bilinear interpolation

 

PTGui 12.8, Bilinear interpolation

 

No pixel shift

 

Pixel Shift

 

It looks like the 2-stack PTGui-assembled images might be a reasonable way to go for 4×5. It does complicate the workflow a bit, but not nearly as much as pixel shifting.

I will make prints to see how big they have to be before these differences matter.

 

GFX 100, GFX 100S

← Stitch scanning 4×5 TMax 100 Visibility of scanning differences in C-size prints →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.