[hugin-ptx] Re: PTAssembler and Hugin
Thank you everyone. I figured these things out. Looks like I can migrate my workflow to mac, at last. Regards JohnQ Erik Krause wrote: > paul womack wrote: > > >> Hugin (actually nona, which hugin drives) is richly configurable >> for interpolation alogorithm, from nearest neighbour to Sinc1024 >> > > ... which are quite good as long as it doesn't come to downsampling. > Always output at suggested maximum size and downsize in your image editor! > > See http://wiki.panotools.org/Interpolation and especially > http://wiki.panotools.org/Aliasing for details. > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: PTAssembler and Hugin
paul womack wrote: > > Hugin (actually nona, which hugin drives) is richly configurable > for interpolation alogorithm, from nearest neighbour to Sinc1024 ... which are quite good as long as it doesn't come to downsampling. Always output at suggested maximum size and downsize in your image editor! See http://wiki.panotools.org/Interpolation and especially http://wiki.panotools.org/Aliasing for details. -- Erik Krause http://www.erik-krause.de --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: Hugin, Enblend and Enfuse—What wen t wrong?
On Wed 17-Dec-2008 at 15:01 -0800, Mötzli wrote: >So between the stacks, I only created control points for one exposure >value (+2EV in my case), but I didn't create control points for the 0 >EV and the -2EV. This is correct, is it? That should be ok, though you do need to create control points between the images in each stack. >Furthermore, I get the blended panorama (pano_fused.tiff), I t >actually doesn't look too bad, but there are highly visible seams >between at least 4 stacks, so I have the impression that enblend >didn't work too well? It's difficult to say what went wrong, can you upload the output image and the .pto project somewhere? -- Bruno --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals?
I found that jpgs reduced the file swapping load. Also, on a box with two HD's you can offload file swapping (vram) to one drive and this leaves the silicon free for processing load. Indeed, you want to optimize with the smaller files. One tip is to just change the file names/paths in the pto when it's time to stitch with the big images. -Original Message- From: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com [mailto:hugin-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bart.van.Andel Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 11:00 AM To: hugin and other free panoramic software Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals? I think what breic means is downsizing in resolution, not merely jpeg file compression. Although jpeg images will load faster than tiffs due to their file size, they use the same amount of memory when loaded and will slow down CP finding, CP manipulation and preview displaying. Since Hugin and the tools used by Hugin use pixel coordinates for the CPs, reoptimizing will fail after replacing small images with bigger ones, because the pixel locations will be different. Just open a .pto file in a text editor to find the coordinates. However, when you have already optimized with the smaller images, you can then close the project, replace the image files with the bigger files and load the project back into Hugin. Don't reoptimize, but go to the Stitcher tab immediately and stitch the image. I just tested it on a small 2 image panorama. It works because after optimizing, the .pto file contains the necessary information about roll, pitch, yaw and other warping values, next to the (at this point unnecessary) CP information. Best, Bart On Dec 19, 2:38 pm, "Don Holeman" wrote: > Forgot to add, jpeg to a lower resolution for the mapping images, but > keep the image dimensions the same. > > -Original Message- > From: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com [mailto:hugin-...@googlegroups.com] > On > > Behalf Of breic > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 11:21 PM > To: hugin and other free panoramic software > Subject: [hugin-ptx] any way of replacing low-resolution images with > higher-resolution originals? > > Since Hugin is slow at loading images on my laptop, I sometimes > downsize the photos before starting the panorama. This lets me keep > my sanity waiting for Hugin, and is often okay if I just want an equirectangular projection. > (I am shooting 10 megapixel images at 27mm equivalent.) However, if I > decide to make a stereographic projection, then I want all the > megapixels available to minimize pixelation in the distorted areas. > Is there any way of replacing the smaller versions with the originals in a project? > Basically, I'd like the control points to be placed appropriately and, > if possible, to reoptimize each control point (although that might not > be necessary). --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals?
I think what breic means is downsizing in resolution, not merely jpeg file compression. Although jpeg images will load faster than tiffs due to their file size, they use the same amount of memory when loaded and will slow down CP finding, CP manipulation and preview displaying. Since Hugin and the tools used by Hugin use pixel coordinates for the CPs, reoptimizing will fail after replacing small images with bigger ones, because the pixel locations will be different. Just open a .pto file in a text editor to find the coordinates. However, when you have already optimized with the smaller images, you can then close the project, replace the image files with the bigger files and load the project back into Hugin. Don't reoptimize, but go to the Stitcher tab immediately and stitch the image. I just tested it on a small 2 image panorama. It works because after optimizing, the .pto file contains the necessary information about roll, pitch, yaw and other warping values, next to the (at this point unnecessary) CP information. Best, Bart On Dec 19, 2:38 pm, "Don Holeman" wrote: > Forgot to add, jpeg to a lower resolution for the mapping images, but keep > the image dimensions the same. > > -Original Message- > From: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com [mailto:hugin-...@googlegroups.com] On > > Behalf Of breic > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 11:21 PM > To: hugin and other free panoramic software > Subject: [hugin-ptx] any way of replacing low-resolution images with > higher-resolution originals? > > Since Hugin is slow at loading images on my laptop, I sometimes downsize the > photos before starting the panorama. This lets me keep my sanity waiting > for Hugin, and is often okay if I just want an equirectangular projection. > (I am shooting 10 megapixel images at 27mm equivalent.) However, if I > decide to make a stereographic projection, then I want all the megapixels > available to minimize pixelation in the distorted areas. Is there any way > of replacing the smaller versions with the originals in a project? > Basically, I'd like the control points to be placed appropriately and, if > possible, to reoptimize each control point (although that might not be > necessary). --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: Hugin, Enblend and Enfuse—What wen t wrong?
Hi Mötzli I always feel it takes to much fidling to do everything in one go in hugin. I shoot 27 images for a 360 panorama, and I always have to spend at least half an hour cleaning up control points or putting them in manually. If I put 4*27 images in hugin I'm busy all day :) I make my panorama in hugin with the best exposed images. I make 3 other panorama's with the other bracketed sets using the 'File > Apply template' command in hugin. (i only optimize exposure for each panorama) Afterwards I run enfuse manually on the 4 panorama's with excellent results. Some other people on this list might have even better advice, but this works for me. hth Maurice On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Mötzli wrote: > > Hello to all, > > I need some help creating an enfused panorama. I followed Bruno's > great tutorial http://hugin.sourceforge.net/tutorials/enfuse-360/en.shtml > (Creating 360° enfused panoramas). My intension is to create"only" an > about 180° panorama, and I did not use a fisheye lens, but I guess > this doesn't make a big difference. > > I shot 24 images (8 bracketed shots with different exposure values). > As in the tutorial described, "I aligned each set of three bracketed > photos as a stack, then I picked just one picture from each of the > eight stacks and aligned these together just like a normal panorama." > So between the stacks, I only created control points for one exposure > value (+2EV in my case), but I didn't create control points for the 0 > EV and the -2EV. This is correct, is it? > > In the stitcher tab I set Blended panorama (enfuse) (which is > "Belichtungsfusion: Panorama" in German) and Blended exposure layers > (Einzelne Belichtungsebenen). I expect the blended exposure layers > option to create 3 panoramas for each EV, but I don't get this three > panoramas. Instead I get 14 different TIFFs: > - pano_exposure_00.tiff > - pano_exposure_01.tiff > - etc... pano_exposure_13.tiff > Some of them seem to be partial panoramas (e.g. the three left images > stitched together) , some of them seem to be a single enfused stack. > > Furthermore, I get the blended panorama (pano_fused.tiff), I t > actually doesn't look too bad, but there are highly visible seams > between at least 4 stacks, so I have the impression that enblend > didn't work too well? > > By the way, in the preview window, the panorama looks quite good, I > cannot find any seams there. > > Any ideas what went wrong? Thanks for any help! > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals?
Forgot to add, jpeg to a lower resolution for the mapping images, but keep the image dimensions the same. -Original Message- From: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com [mailto:hugin-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of breic Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 11:21 PM To: hugin and other free panoramic software Subject: [hugin-ptx] any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals? Since Hugin is slow at loading images on my laptop, I sometimes downsize the photos before starting the panorama. This lets me keep my sanity waiting for Hugin, and is often okay if I just want an equirectangular projection. (I am shooting 10 megapixel images at 27mm equivalent.) However, if I decide to make a stereographic projection, then I want all the megapixels available to minimize pixelation in the distorted areas. Is there any way of replacing the smaller versions with the originals in a project? Basically, I'd like the control points to be placed appropriately and, if possible, to reoptimize each control point (although that might not be necessary). --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals?
Yes, I did this same thing to produce some HDR panoramas. Map with the low resolution images, then when you want to stitch, swap them out with hi res versions of the same image, using the same names. Hugin won't know the difference. The second pano down, Lyman, on this page was done that way. http://holeman.org/photos1.html -Original Message- From: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com [mailto:hugin-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of breic Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 11:21 PM To: hugin and other free panoramic software Subject: [hugin-ptx] any way of replacing low-resolution images with higher-resolution originals? Since Hugin is slow at loading images on my laptop, I sometimes downsize the photos before starting the panorama. This lets me keep my sanity waiting for Hugin, and is often okay if I just want an equirectangular projection. (I am shooting 10 megapixel images at 27mm equivalent.) However, if I decide to make a stereographic projection, then I want all the megapixels available to minimize pixelation in the distorted areas. Is there any way of replacing the smaller versions with the originals in a project? Basically, I'd like the control points to be placed appropriately and, if possible, to reoptimize each control point (although that might not be necessary). --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] Re: PTAssembler and Hugin
my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > I just started to use Hugin, but have an experience with PTAssembler. > What I noticed is that Hugin creates panoramas much faster then > PTAssembler. PTAssembler has a choice of different interpolation > algorithms, which can be useful for the first trial stitch and strongest > for final version. Does this mean that Hugin uses simple interpolation > algorithm? Hugin (actually nona, which hugin drives) is richly configurable for interpolation alogorithm, from nearest neighbour to Sinc1024 BugBear --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[hugin-ptx] PTAssembler and Hugin
I just started to use Hugin, but have an experience with PTAssembler. What I noticed is that Hugin creates panoramas much faster then PTAssembler. PTAssembler has a choice of different interpolation algorithms, which can be useful for the first trial stitch and strongest for final version. Does this mean that Hugin uses simple interpolation algorithm? Regards, JohnQ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
