Roger, Chris, Bruno,
If I understand correctly the images that Roger has identified as the
cause of the crash are:
t3_exposure_layers_0024.tif
t3_exposure_layers_0025.tif
and these are the images that would come out of the Nona phase of my
original project with the same numerical suffixes. The suffixes run
from 0 to 26 for my 27x image, 9x stack project with 3x bracketed
images in each stack. So these are the first and second image in the
9th stack!
(I had misunderstood earlier and assumed that the problematic pair
bridged the 8th and 9th stacks but if Roger's suffix-numbering matches
the numbering in the original project they are both in the 9th
stack.
Bruno,
My 8th and 9th stacks are applying exactly the method that you
mentioned for removing the photographers shadow and feet. My
misunderstanding of the numbering earlier had me thinking that that
was a problem.)
So if I correctly understand Bruno's explanation of how Hugin decides
on which images to stack/blend and which to layer/fuse ... then the
question for me is ... why was Hugin TRYING to apply Enblend these two
images?
I originally entered them with a Yaw of 0 ... but after Optimization
they were each placed as follows:
Yaw: -1.775 Pitch: -82.729 Roll: 39.543
Yaw: -1.836 Pitch: -82.735 Roll: 39.621
This is nothing like Bruno's 10% angle threshold ... So why would
Hugin apply Enblend to them?
all the best
George
On 16 Oct, 21:00, Bruno Postle <br...@postle.net> wrote:
> On Fri 16-Oct-2009 at 10:15 -0700, grow wrote:
>
>
>
> >Something that has always puzzled me in the Hugin GUI is how images
> >are selected to be part of a stack (that gets enfused) or part of a
> >layer (that get enblended together)
> >How does it decide?
>
> Hugin checks the yaw and pitch of all photos, and any where these
> angles vary less than 10% of the photo's angle of view are
> considered 'stacks' (with Fused and Blended output).
>
> This can obviously fail for nadir/zenith situations, really the
> absolute angular distance should be checked, but this has never been
> reported as a bug so probably the way we do it is 'good enough'
> (patches welcome though).
>
> Similarly any photos with less than 0.5EV exposure difference are
> considered 'exposure layers' (with Blended and Fused output)'.
>
> What is wrong is that although these decisions get written to the
> .pto.mk files, there is nothing in the GUI to tell the user which
> photos are being grouped like this - You have to run the stitch to
> find out.
>
> >Is there some way that I can better indicate to Hugin how to handle
> >images that overlap except for masked areas? Or should I just give up
> >and merge these images in a separate pass.
>
> I think enblend is still the right tool. This is how I shoot two
> shots to get rid of my own shadow, but I give them a different 'yaw'
> to force a vertical seam. i.e. this panorama doesn't have a
> retouched nadir, it is more-or-less how it came out of Hugin:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/36383...@n00/2893620038
>
> ..I should do a tutorial.
>
> --
> 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
