Photo Merging Comparison – Adobe Photoshop vs Microsoft Windows Live Image Composite Editor.
While in Rome I took a few pics. Quite a few of these with the view to stitch them together. I thought I’d compare the difference between Adobe Photoshop’s Photomerge and Microsoft’s Windows Live Image Composite Editor to see who’s better when it comes to stitching images together. The original images weren’t shot on anything special just a point and shoot Nikon Coolpix S3 6.0 Megapixels.
It is important to remember that automated photo merging is no walk in the park. The mind boggles to think of the maths that is going on behind the scenes. Both programs are adjusting the size, perspective, levels, etc of multiple images and then stitching them together "seamlessly" (sometimes more seamlessly than others). To best compare the programs I’ve include a series of panoramas, some made up 4 or 5 images others 26. The final images have only been cropped and in the case of Windows Live images the default black jpeg matt has been removed, there has been no further editing post photo merging such as levels etc, the results speak for themselves:
The Trevi Fountain, Rome. Made up of 9 original images, merged dimensions 9001 x 5485 pixels.
Photoshop Photomerge
Windows Live Image Composite Editor
St Peter’s Basilica and Square Vatican City. Made up of 26 original images, merged dimensions of 19524 x 7078 pixels.
Photoshop Photomerge
Windows Live Image Composite Editor
The Vatican Museum, Vatican City. Made up of 6 images, with merged dimensions of 10665 x 5933 pixels.
Photoshop Photomerge
Windows Live Image Composite Editor
The Pantheon, Rome. Made up of 7 images, with merged dimensions of 9348 x 4549 pixels.
Photoshop Photomerge
Windows Live Image Composite Editor
View of Roman Forum from the Palatine Lookout, Rome. Made up of 15 images, with merged dimensions of 8368 x 3911 pixels.
Photoshop Photomerge
Windows Live Image Composite Editor
It is clear to see that you get the best results when 10 or less images are used, also the smaller the degree of pan the better. I think that this just comes down to differences in light in different directions – meaning that there is less manipulation for the programs to do. Comparing the images side by side it is clear to see that Windows Live Image Composite Editor gives better and more consistent results. I’m really happy with how these panoramas have turned out, even with such a simple point and shoot camera. I can only dream of how they would have looked if I had a Digital SLR (maybe one day).
A slight point of annoyance is the export process using Windows Live Image Composite Editor. The default matt for a jpeg file is black, and I can’t seem to find an option to change it. Oh and in typical Microsoft form the product name is far too long…
For convenience sake original images have not been uploaded as some are 37+ MB. I am more than happy to provide originals if you’d like to hang them on your walls (for private use, not commercial use). If you’d like to use any of the images commercially just drop me an email and I sure that we can come to an arrangement.
You should try Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor could, which can be seen as the next version of WLICE and which give you advanced control and fine tuning over the stitch.
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/ICE/
Hi there,
I did in fact use Windows Live Photo Gallery with the Microsoft Image Composite Editor (Version 1.1r1) plug in and had no problem with the quality of the stitch. The stitch was a higher quality (and faster to generate) than Photoshop’s Photomerge. My complaint was with the default jpeg matt being black when the image is exported. Do you know how to change the jpeg matt colour?