"I think "a new Hugin" should provide only two direct stitching targets: cube faces and equirectangular, and let you convert either of those to other projections later." I agree with this completely. The only other point I was trying to make is that "converting to other projections" should not involve one project file per projection IMHO.
Thanks, nick On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Tom Sharpless <tksharpl...@gmail.com>wrote: > > As seems to be usual, I agree with Bruno. > > The job of a stitcher is to prepare, match up, line up, and combine > images on the panosphere. Generating some flat projection of the > panosphere is a necessary part of that job, but generating all > possible projections is not. Creating printable views involves so > many possibilities, and so many aesthetic considerations, that it is a > speciality all its own. And repeating the entire process from source > images to get each view is a big waste of time: things like lens > correction, photometric correction and, especially, blending really > need to be done only once. > > I think "a new Hugin" should provide only two direct stitching > targets: cube faces and equirectangular, and let you convert either of > those to other projections later. > > I include equirectangular only for the sake of tradition. Cube faces > have several advantages. You can display them almost immediately with > QuickTime or Flash technology. Because they are rectilinear images, > they are easy to judge, and to retouch. And they even let you > stitch faster, because to map from a radially symmetric projection > (e.g. almost any photo) to a radially symmetric projection, you only > have to implement a nonlinear function in one dimension, along the > radius. That one dimensional mapping can be a lookup table; whereas > to stitch to equirectangular requires a full 2-D nonlinear mapping (I > use this trick in autopano-sift-c to generate stereographic images > faster than is possible with libpano). > > For composing "just the right view" you need an interactive program, > that can custom fit the projection to the subject to some extent > (think of a view camera on steroids). Both my Panini, and Max Lyons' > PTAssembler preview window, come close (from different directions) to > what I would ideally want. Maybe the new Hugin suite should > incorporate such a program; but it ought not to be configured as a set > of sub-options on stitching. > > Regards, Tom > > On Oct 14, 4:44 pm, Bruno Postle <br...@postle.net> wrote: > > On Wed 14-Oct-2009 at 16:09 -0400, Nicolas Pelletier wrote: > > > > >I'm not convinced it is a post processing step. I think it depends on > where > > >we draw the what should hugin do boundary. > > > > I guess that where I'm coming from is that Hugin and the Stitcher > > tab are complex enough as it is. > > > > >I'm currently working with the exact workflow you mentioned, create a > 360 > > >180 equi and then use this as the first element in the chain. But if the > > >other steps were only post processing, then why should we have other > > >projections and other import method? > > > > Mainly because we can, but also because partial panoramas are > > legitimate targets, and because people have a use for stitching > > partial equirectangular and cylindrical input. > > > > >Also, from this equirectangular, if we had many output, we could have a > nice > > >workflow that generate all 6 faces of the cubes for some VR interface > > >without needing another tool, or swapping around with the same project > or 6 > > >projects. > > > > We do actually have much of this (cubic, little-planet, thumbnails, > > QTVR, PanoSalado etc...) as targets in the Makefile.equirect.mk > > plugin - It would be trivially easy to enable this stuff in the > > Stitcher tab or the Batch Processor, but it adds a bunch of > > dependencies (ImageMagick, perl(Panotools::Script)). > > > > >> You can do this in Hugin, just import the equirectangular into a new > > >> project and use the various output projections, or use Tom's Panini > > >> tool which is specifically designed for extracting different views. > > > > >> What I'm trying to say is that the 'many' part is necessarily a > > >> post-processing step, and doesn't really benefit from being > > >> integrated into Hugin. > > > > -- > > Bruno > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
