Hello Gunter
On 09.05.22 21:09, Gunter Königsmann wrote:
Two possible reasons I can think of: If you place 100 control points
very near to each other they will count more than a few control points
at the edges caused by their sheer number.
...and if the lens distortion isn't modeled accurately for your lens
there is a high probability that the middle of the lens can be matched
better than the edges of the viewport. --
I've got several cameras with even more lenses, and your "high
probability" is a slight understatement. I run enblend with --visualize
and inspect the vis files after each stitch. Switching on the
mathematically challenged parameters a and c sometimes make things
really worse.
Usually I use b, d and e. With 360° one needs also v. With good image
material the average deviations as indicated in the optimiser are 1/2
pixel. Compare this to 1/10 pixel from Finetune, my finding from a few
years ago.
"lens distortion isn't modeled accurately" - please include more of
Brown-Conrady into hugin - or hugin++
Best regards
Klaus
P.S. Of course some lenses underperform in the corners, and the issue of
mechanical vignetting may come up which requires maths beyond
Brown-Conrady to model.
--
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/03515f20-d739-88a4-b8c6-6fede61a83b0%40gmail.com.
