Hi group! I'm currently working on a script that relies heavily on masking. The script generates the masks to arbitrary precision. Most of the time I was using spacings of about 100 pixels for the masks, and all was well. Today, while testing, I generated much more precise masks. I set the spacing to one pixel, and this threw a spanner in the works when I tried to process the data with nona. I didn't wait for the process to terminate and tried with 10 pixel stride. This increased processing time by roughly 200%!
So I made the test and made a single-image pto and put a 125-point mask on the
image manually, just to be sure it wasn't some strange effect of my script. It
took nona over 11 seconds to render the image. when I removed the mask, it only
took 4.4 seconds. This was with a 12MP 16bit TIFF in stereographic projection,
on Pre-Release 2010.5.0.a11acbf8be1d. I wonder if anyone else has noticed this?
Has it been like this all along? Maybe I'm the only one using masks with more
than a couple of dozen points?
I've attached the .msk file which I used to slow down nona.
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
nonatest.msk
Description: Binary data
