> Well, 0.01� make 300 micrometre offset in a distance of 3 metre but > you have much more than that. > ok. maybe i was exagerating a little bit, but a 60deg fov divided for 4000pixels makes 0,015deg for a pixel-perfect match, so it's not exagerated to say e.g. 0,03deg for a goodresolution panorama. This said, I believe all of you when you say this *should *be done with CPs (and so i'm trying to get it working) but i still believe that a better preview wouldn't do anything but good. @Bruno: i think in these years i tried almost everything, but I'll keep trying, thanks for your help and patience. Eventually I could post some example of what i cannot get to work if you don't mind...
-- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
