sorry to take this thread off on a tanget, but can i clarify bruno's statement?
so your standard 6 shots around and 1 shot up pano (fullframe fisheye) where the "up" shot has been rotated to landscape orientation by the camera - this should not pose any problems for hugin? why is it HFOV and not FOV "in the narrow image dimension" ? wouldn't this be better? On Sunday, January 23, 2011 9:53:11 PM UTC+1, bruno.postle wrote: > > On Sat 22-Jan-2011 at 23:57 -0800, kfj wrote: > > > > In theory this is a fine idea. But keep in mind one point that noone > > ever adresses in this whole discussion: The treatment of FOV in hugin > > is, if I am interpreting the mechanism right, fundamentally flawed. > > The only thing that is asked for and processed seems to be the > > HORIZONTAL field of view. Now if I make images with an APSC sensor > > and, in landscape mode, have a HFOV of 60 degrees, then do some shots > > in portrait, suddenly the HFOV is 40 degrees. > > It doesn't really work like this. Hugin looks exclusively at the > image dimensions, so both the landscape and portrait shots will have > the same lens number and field of view. > > If you have actually rotated the pixels of one photo in an image > editor then Hugin will see two different lens numbers and field of > views, but the field of view will be 'correct' and doesn't need > to be changed to get a good stitch. > > -- > 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
