On 27 Jul., 10:16, Jeffrey Martin <360cit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kay, > > do you have any examples of images we can see (before / after) showing that > this really works? i'd love to see that :)
Mysterious... here you've dug out a resopnse to a thread I made in May. And lo and behold, calling enfuse --help just now the options I quoted aren't there. That took me some figuring out, but I think I know what happened. I was using a bleeding edge version of enfuse then, but it had a bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/enblend/+bug/787387 So I reverted to an older version, and I suppose that one hasn't got the --exposure-cutoff parameter, even though it makes great sense. So currently, this is just theory and I've got nothing to show demonstrating the efficacy of this option. But I trust it - after all enfuse's statistics are very straightforward. It's just that a cutoff may cause a discontinuity which becomes visible if the step is too large, so cutoffs have to be treated with caution. If the desired effect can be achieved by tweaking mu and sigma, there are no discontinuities in the weighting functions. If using a cutoff is considered, additionally tweaking mu and sigma may lessen the discontinuity's magnitude. 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
