The only retouch is to crop them out. Which may not be possible if they are in the scene. So the real alternative is to save up on my retirement funds buy that gimble from RRS.
Well, the Gimbal alone wonāt give you the necessary nodal points. And there are limits, even for the best pano-stitching software, to bend back the plane view into a cylindrical view. I believe the lens corrections partly can work against the stitching software. Itās a fake reality and as such the glitches will become noticeable sooner or later.
George, why so many pictures ? Is it a challenge !
I have made many panoramas and I donāt feel the necessity of very great panos (gigapixels like Autopano could do).
Examples on this slideshow or this one from Himalaya
All pictures are shot handheld and no issue at stitching.
1 Like
Itās the picture you want. I used 70mm and I needed 33 images. Itās not that I wanted so many but it came out to be. I used 70mm on a D700 FF. It was also a challenge.
To be honest, I had it print on A1 but I donāt know what to do with it. 
George
I routinely use multishot techniques (panorama/piecerama, exposure bracketing, sometimes even focus stacks). In LR multishot is simple and high quality (though it would be better have single command for it instead of selection of two). It would be serious timesaver to have unified multishot ability within PL too, instead of having to fiddle them separately.
2 Likes
The panorama function in Affinity Photo is good enough that I donāt miss one in PhotoLab. Manages to turn a ZV-E1 with 12 MP into a 77MP camera. This image is 30000px wide.
With panorama, itās a multi-step process anyway for the photographer. First one must process the RAW files well and identically to create good material for the panorama, then one must do the panorama function.
Theoretically PhotoLab could take the processed RAWS and pre-process them and then build a panorama that one could rebuild after making changes. I donāt see how it would save a lot of time. Building the panorama directly out of RAW and allowing us to use local adjustments and repair tools on the intermediate image would use a tremendous amount of memory and create some issues with CPU usage as well.
Top end M1 Macs (Ultras with 128GB memory) could do this but itās only about 10% of the PhotoLab computer park.
For convenience, it is hard to beat Lightroom / ACR to produce a usable result, with its ability to fill out sky / water etc.
If you want to play, then PTGui is still the best pro tool, but you are probably best feeding it with DXO-processed TIFFs for best results as its RAW process seems fairly rudimentary.
1 Like
Yes. A very old one. It was about the only one way to do this cleanly at some time. 
For cost itās hard to beat Microsoft Image Composite Editor, which is free but hard to find, or Affinity Photo, which isnāt free but is dirt cheap compare to an Adobe subscription. Both of these applications also can autofill the edges of a panorama.
2 Likes
The test I did with ICE and Affinity was won by ICE.
If you want a copy WeTransfer - Send Large Files & Share Photos Online - Up to 2GB Free
The link stays available for 6 days I believe.
George
2 Likes
What are Mac OS option for an occasional panorama stitch?
I come from Lightroom Classic and itās honestly a tad disappointing to not even have the most basic photostitch feature in DXO PL7 Elite.
Judging from this thread Iām stuck: I canāt use Microsoft ICE; I tried Hugin but the latest version I could find crashes on MacOS.
Do I really need to spend more money?
Platform: MacBook Air M1, macOS Sequoia 15.2
Try Affinity Photo. Not expensive and a really good replacement for Photoshop.
3 Likes
The best option for straightforward panoramas is Affinity Photo. Panorama builds are automated, with great results. Do your RAW processing first in PhotoLab and then build the panorama from TIFFs or jpegs. Absolutely painless. Thereās not much point in DxO tormenting themselves building a panorama module for PhotoLab as live RAW processing of merged files with 30,000+ horizontal pixels would bring even the most powerful GPU to its knees.
4 Likes
Thereās not much point in DxO tormenting themselves building a panorama module for PhotoLab as live RAW processing of merged files with 30,000+ horizontal pixels would bring even the most powerful GPU to its knees.
I donāt understand this argument. This would apply to any photo software. Also who talked about live RAW processing?
1 Like
OK so as a DXO customer in order to do even the most basic panorama photo stich I get the suggestion to buy a competing photo editing suite (which by the way costs less). Great marketing on DXO part.
I am not going to spend another $80 for an occasional photo stich job.
This is honestly a joke.
1 Like
PhotoLab is not a bitmap editor, though it has some bitmap capabilities. Affinity Photo is far more than a panorama tool. Itās also regularly on sale with the whole Affinity Suite.
If this is the kind of attitude you have, donāt expect much help. Donāt let the door slam on you on the way out. Merry Christmas.
2 Likes
Microsoft ICE is a wonderful panorama stitcher and free. To me better as Affinity. Itās discontinued but must be somewhere on the web. Otherwise Iāve it.
George
1 Like
Indeed. I also use it for assembling focus stacks and filling in the corners of rotated and cropped images.
PhotoLab is an amazing RAW editor but, instead of DxO spending inordinate amounts of time and money, building a āSwiss Army knifeā, I would rather choose the tools that has been developed and specialised for the task in hand. I also use Topaz Photo AI for preparation and enlarging for printing at larger sizes.
PhotoLab might be extended, but how long is it going to take to catch up with the decades of experience and excellence that these more specialised apps bring to the table?
But it only used to be available for Windows, not Mac. Donāt you ever wonder why it has come to the end of its life?
1 Like
I donāt know why they stopped. It was part of Microsoft Research.
I just checked. It can be downloaded from the internet. But Windowsā¦
George
After many years of programming for Windows, I needed to replace my aging Dell laptop. A friend encouraged me to look at Apple and, to my surprise, to get the same specification, it would have cost me more to continue with Windows.
I was able to use Parallels to run Windows on the Mac and no longer needed to pay for MS Office as macOS comes with perfectly adequate replacements.
I soon started to look at developing for Mac, especially when I found that the Xcode development tools were totally free and were far easier to use than Visual Studio and the .NET framework, which were always changing and requiring rewrites to catch up.
I find it interesting that Windows users seem to have to mess around selecting and upgrading graphics cards to run PhotoLab. All I need to do on my Mac is simply run PhotoLab.
2 Likes