Photoshop Elements: Ghosting in Photomerge Exposure

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 7 years ago
  • (Edited)
Elements 10 Photomerge Exposure does not seem to work correctly as in prior versions. The merge appears to not match the images in the pictures so that object alignment is off by 5-10 pixels, creating ghosting along object edges. Can anyone help?
Photo of Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • frustrated

Posted 7 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Brett N

Brett N, Official Rep

  • 2258 Posts
  • 115 Reply Likes
Can you post images of your Photomerge results? Take the same photos in Elements 10 and whatever previous version you are using, and put them side-by-side?
Photo of Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Interesting! I went back to 2 images that I had used PE9 Photomerge Exposure on and used PE10 Photomerge Exposure. I got identical results, a good high resolution image, attached. The two images I merged were taken on my Canon SX110. The images I have been having a problem with were taken on my new Canon SX40HS. Could a different camera cause this? I will send a 2nd reply with the images from the SX40HS.
Photo of Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Here are the 2 SX40 images that I used PE10 Photomerge Exposure on and the merged file. You have to zoom in the roof tops to see that PE10 did not match the roof lines in the merged image. The SX40 does not have "Fine" and "Superfine" settings that the SX110 has, so the images from the SX40 have more JPG artifacts that from the SX110. Could this be the reason PE10 has trouble with the SX40 images?
Photo of Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Correction. SX40 has Fine setting, which the camera was set to, but not Superfine.
Photo of Brett N

Brett N, Official Rep

  • 2258 Posts
  • 115 Reply Likes
I'm not sure if it has to do with the Fine vs Superfine setting, but there are differences between these two shots. The ghosting is appearing because the image data differs. You can see this if you open both images into single document (copy/paste the image into the other image), so that you have them as two layers perfectly overlapping each other (frame-wise). What you will see if you hide and then reveal the top layer is the line of the roof tops moving. This is an alignment issue with the images. Again, I don't know if this is because of the model of camera, or perhaps a minor error in how the images were taken.
Photo of Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson

  • 8 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Frame mis-alignment was not a problem in PE9. PE9 would find the object edges in the pictures and align on those, not the frame. So if PE10 Photomerge Exposure is the same algorithm as in PE9 (is it?), I shouldn't have manually align the images. I corresponded with Canon, who said that "fine" on the SX40 is the same as "superfine" on the SX110. However, a close up inspection of images from the 2 cameras shows me that there are more uniform JPG artifacts, kind of a stairstep effect, in the SX40 images than in the SX110. Taking pictures handheld, the stairstep JPG artifacts will appear at different locations, perhaps making it harder for PE10 Photomerge Exposure to find object edges. I hope this helps your investigation. Thanks.
Photo of Dan Smith

Dan Smith

  • 225 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
Did you try manual instead of automatic?