On Jan 5, 11:38 pm, Erik Krause <[email protected]> wrote: > What about using multiblend as an > alternative blending engine for enblend? I guess much of the work is > done already in enblend (read different image formats, 360 -wrapping, > seam optimization etc.), so why invent the wheel again?
One reason (the main reason, before I discovered how much quicker I could get the blending done) for writing multiblend in the first place was to improve on the way Enblend creates its initial seams before optimisation (though as has been discovered multiblend's approach can cause problems, which need fixing). 360 degree wrapping is a function of the blending process, so a multiblend-specific solution needs to be found (I suspect Enblend's solution stems from the fact that it does many separate blends, so won't be compatible with multiblend). So while there may be ideas multiblend can borrow from Enblend and vice versa, I don't think a hybrid would be an improvement. Even optimised seams won't always give the best results. This was another aim of multiblend, to one day incorporate a seam editor (the ancient GUI version of multiblend had a proof-of-concept of this) so you can do tricks like drawing snaking lines back and forth across water to hide the seam, or around people and other moving objects (though the latter can be achieved using Hugin masks). David -- 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
