sven,
E-mail me privately with a set of example photos, and i'll take a peek at them and see if there is a solution. Dale > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 07:17:06 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Linear projection > From: _...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > On 24 Nov., 19:05, A319 <sven.steu...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > We took about 150 pictures > > along 10 parallel routes (10 series of pictures) out of the window. > > Looking at your images, I notice that they are quite distorted. It > looks as if you had actually taken them through a window, and probably > a not very plane one. With starting material like that, the control > point generators are having a very hard time. If you have to take > aerial photogaphs through a window, make sure you always hold the > camera as close to the pane as possible and set the camera to infinite > distance (pocket cameras often have a little 'mountains' symbol for > that). If there is a pane, though, and you try to photograph > downwards, you hit the pane at a shallow angle, creating bad > distortions. Ideally you'd have the camera pointing straight down > without a pane in between; I realize this may not be feasible, but > with a pane in between your images become very hard to process at all. > What I don't understand about your images is why they are all > different sizes. This confuses the optimizer, since it tries to create > different fields of view etc. for every image. Best to leave them as > you get them out of the camera - if there are any artifacts in them > (plane's wings etc.) it's easy to exclude them using the masking > feature. > If at all possible, all the images should be taken with similar yaw > and pitch, to allow initial optimization of X,Y and Z inside the > strips with the pitch and yaw set to estimated figures. So if you can, > just mount the camera and leave it like that. If you have a camera > that you can remote-control, you can mount it on the plane pointing > straight down and control it from inside the plane. Try using short > exposure times (if you can't set the exposure time, use a high ISO > setting) to minimize distortions due to vibrations. > Finally, you should take the images in regular time intervals and try > to create sufficient overlap between them, I found your images don't > always overlap sufficiently. > > > As you can see, there are serval problems with the highway. What you > > can not see are errors in the forest. > > I see the biggest problem in the pictures. I doubt you'll find any > tool to get a decent output from that batch. With a lot af handwork > you'll approach a solution, but it will be far from optimal. I > recommend you do another take. > > with regards > Kay > > -- > 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 -- 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
