I think it's just down to the blender's differing methods of determining seams. I don't know how verdandi works, but Enblend and multiblend use different methods.
Enblend's initial seaming method is more mathematically "precise," but it's a bit of a false precision because it won't practically lead to better stitches. Enblend then also refines seams by following the contours in image overlaps, which is probably what's making the biggest difference. The blurred patch is not down to the blending as such, but is already present in scan-1.jpg. multiblend's seam has not run so close to the edge of the image, but Enblend has probably refined itself in that direction. The best like-for-like test between Enblend would be with --no-optimize and --fine-mask added to the Enblend command line. However, even with those switches, once you start blending more than two images you'll find Enblend's seams will differ more and more from multiblend's. Finally, if you're after timing comparisons, you're going to need a *much* bigger panorama. Most of the 6 seconds taken by all the stitchers will be loading and saving of images. multiblend's speed advantage over Enblend rises exponentially with panorama size. 172x faster was the best I got, and that was with Enblend crashing part way through. -- A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ --- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/6e57b191-ed79-47dc-a4f6-c91c62c965f7%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
