Hullo All,
A follow-up on my original post on this subject.
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 10:05:16 +1100, Terry Duell <tdu...@iinet.net.au>
wrote:
[snip]
The main problem thus far has been obtaining a sufficiently accurate
alignment of the blur-sharp image pair, so I am currently trying a
scheme of iterating the alignment, basically as follows;
1. Align blur-sharp pair and save remapped images.
2. Estimate blur kernel and deblur the remapped blur.
3. Generate CPs for the deblur and sharp, save .pto, edit .pto to
substitute remapped blur for deblur, then get a new alignment.
4. Go to 2, and repeat the process.
The iterative process does improve the alignment a bit each step when
optimising y,p,r,v. I have run into problems when attempting to add lens
parameters to the optimisation. The distortion coefficients are reported
to be large and the FPW image goes haywire.
Is there any fundamental problem in attempting to optimise everything when
re-aligning remapped images?
Cheers,
--
Regards,
Terry Duell
--
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
