Brilliant! Clever and inexpensive panorama camera.

[pbromaghin]

This is so cool.

http://www.appcott.co.uk/VINTAGE6X6/PANORAMICS/FOUR-ISOLETTE-APOTARS/PANORAMIC_4CAM-APOTAR.htm

 

[dmr]

Unique idea, but I can most definitely see some banding in the shots.

I would think that an odd number (3? 5?) of cameras might be better for this. Get the discontinuities to the sides.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Clever!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It hybrid, not film only. But I guess some contact prints are possible.
For static shots, I guess, you could get it with one camera in multiple brackets.

 

[Love2Live]

Hi there l'm no expert but surely the major flaw here is that each camera uses film.
Each film would therefore in its own class, even though its the exact same spec, there will surely be very slight differences.
Each exposure will be subject to the quirks of the glass used
Therefore you'd get the banding seen.
I still think it's pretty the banding could probably be dealt with using software - but l like the previous poster's advice, using just one camera reduces differences between exposures because the glass and film roll are a constant, across each exposure. Even if there are animals moving about, you can stitch them all together. Maybe create a family of precisely cloned ponies at a watering hole, just from one pony lol.

If only vignetting could be eradicated

 

[AgX]

Such camera set-up is classic in aerial reconnaisance. However there is no need to merge images.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Such camera set-up is classic in aerial reconnaisance. However there is no need to merge images.

Not quite that camera set up. The four Isolettes' (sounds like a singing group, doesn't it?) fields of view converge. In the classic three aerial camera setups, the cameras' fields of view diverge. See, for example, the Tri-Metrogon rig shown in
https://www.asprs.org/wp-content/uploads/pers/1964journal/jan/1964_jan_97-110.pdf figure 16.

 

[AgX]

But I said, "there is no need to merge" into one image.
In reconnaissance it was sufficient to have several images apart.

 

[Dan Fromm]

But I said, "there is no need to merge" into one image.
In reconnaissance it was sufficient to have several images apart.

They overlap, can be and have been merged.

 

[nmp]

I don't get it, why one couldn't just use one camera and pan?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I don't get it, why one couldn't just use one camera and pan?

In the time to advance the film and position properly, slight motion of clouds and resulting shadows would produce artifacts.

However, using a single camera with auto film advance and mounted on a tripod with predetermined points to rotate the head, the photos could be made very quickly and that effect would be minimized.

If, however, the panorama is of a sporting event or even a crowd of people somewhere, there's no substitute for either a single exposed frame covering a wide angle, or multiple simultaneous exposures.

I've seen 20-foot long prints which comprise a 360-degree panorama - one scene was made at Disneyland - and there are numerous places in the print where you see the same people because the rotation of the lens was slow.