[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Freitag 25 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf:
2009/9/25 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
Am Freitag 25 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf:
Now I get a normal error message
Does this happen with automake too?
With the latest autoconf I get an error during the configure step. So, I
can't build.
Maybe time to switch to texlive2008? (If that is available on OSX)
Kornel
-
I just uninstalled TeTex and installed texlive 2007 as that's available.
I now get:
snip
THUMBPDF 3.8, 2005/07/06 - Copyright (c) 1999-2005 by Heiko Oberdiek.
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
*** clear temp files ***
!!! Error: Cannot open
I get here:
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
[1{/usr/local/texlive/2008/texmf
-var/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map}] [2] (./enfuse.toc) [-1] (./enfuse.toc
...
So, maybe you have ghostscript not installed?
...
When checking, the pdf's seem to be built correctly as the thumbpdf only
provides a thumbnail for the pdf AFAIK.
OK.
The html's are not entirely correct as the images are not available.
Ok, this is my error. I should copy the .gif -files into this directory too.
(I did it manually, and now I can see the images in firefox)
Currently the html's are built as split files. This means that inside the
doc directory another directory enblend.html and enfuse.html are
created where all the html files are placed.
This is the same, as automake makes here.
The png's remain at doc level.
Same error for automake. So we will be the first with correct creation. :)
When an unsplit html is created it remains as enfuse.html (file) in the doc
directory at the same level as the png's.
I'm not sure the autoconf does this correct as currently the .configure
step fails.
configure step, or make? I had to call
make VPATH=. html
to make it create enblend.html.
Harry
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf: I just tried, but where do I find this enblend_file.html or enfuse_file.html or the final versions? When running make I can't find them and with running make package I can't find them either. This is my output Inside the Build-directory #rm doc/enblend_file.html #make package ... /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_progress_report /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/CMakeFiles [ 57%] makeinfo: Creating /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/doc/enblend.html from /usr/src/enblend/enblend/doc/enblend.texi cd /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/doc /usr/local/texlive/2008/bin/x86_64-linux/makeinfo --html --no-split --css- include=/usr/src/enblend/enblend/doc/default.css -I /usr/src/enblend/enblend/doc -o /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/doc/enblend_file.html /usr/src/enblend/enblend/doc/enblend.texi make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend' /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_progress_report /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/CMakeFiles 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 [100%] Built target doc3 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend' /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_progress_start /usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend/CMakeFiles 0 make -f CMakeFiles/Makefile2 preinstall make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend' make[1]: Nothing to be done for `preinstall'. make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/BUILD/BuildEnblend' Run CPack packaging tool... ... Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
snip
THUMBPDF 3.8, 2005/07/06 - Copyright (c) 1999-2005 by Heiko Oberdiek.
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
*** clear temp files ***
!!! Error: Cannot open
I get here:
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
[1{/usr/local/texlive/2008/texmf
-var/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map}] [2] (./enfuse.toc) [-1]
(./enfuse.toc
...
So, maybe you have ghostscript not installed?
I have ghostscript 8.70_0 installed. It's in the same directory
/opt/local/bin as the other tools. As far as I can see there is no test for
gs in the CMakeLists.txt. Am I correct?
Harry
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: fonction0 in boost is not included from the correct place with debian
Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) jean.luc.cou...@gmail.com wrote: I've updated debian sid. In the update, all boost related stuff changed to version 1.40.0 In libboost1.40-dev, function0.hpp is located in /usr/include/boost/ function/function0.hpp ./src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h has to be adjusted to include the correct path. Hello, looks like the problem is that in previous boost releases boost/thread/thread.hpp already #included boost/function.hpp. I think this is easily fixed by unconditionally doing the #include. (After this patch hugin still builds against boost 1.34.1 on Linux while not failing to build with boost 1.40. cu andreas diff -NurbBp a/src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h b/src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h --- a/src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h2009-09-21 03:04:06.0 +0200 +++ b/src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h2009-09-26 16:33:10.0 +0200 @@ -42,9 +42,7 @@ #include MultiThreadOperations.h #include boost/thread/thread.hpp #include boost/bind.hpp -#ifdef __APPLE__ -#include boost/function.hpp -#endif +#include boost/function.hpp namespace vigra_ext --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf:
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
snip
THUMBPDF 3.8, 2005/07/06 - Copyright (c) 1999-2005 by Heiko Oberdiek.
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
*** clear temp files ***
!!! Error: Cannot open
I get here:
*** make png files / run Ghostscript ***
[1{/usr/local/texlive/2008/texmf
-var/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map}] [2] (./enfuse.toc) [-1]
(./enfuse.toc
...
So, maybe you have ghostscript not installed?
I have ghostscript 8.70_0 installed. It's in the same directory
/opt/local/bin as the other tools. As far as I can see there is no test for
gs in the CMakeLists.txt. Am I correct?
Yes, that is correct. I don't know, where and how gs is called :(
Harry
Meanwhile the html-creation should include the images.
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de Meanwhile the html-creation should include the images. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de Only 3 out of 9 images are copied. focus-stack-decision-tree.png local-analysis-window.png photographic-workflow.png W.r.t. both the pdf's and html's: Christoph's versioning is not working (yet). It now displays #define _CONFIG_COMPILER_H on the front page. Thansk so far for all your work! Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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] Commiting problems
Hi Christoph, I have problems to commit my changes. This is the sequence I am facing: hg commit --ok hg push -- searching for changes abort: push creates new remote heads! (did you forget to merge? use push -f to force) hg pull pulling from http://enblend.hg.sourceforge.net:8000/hgroot/enblend searching for changes no changes found hg update 0 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved ... I don't understand. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Commiting problems
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko: Hi Christoph, I have problems to commit my changes. Ok, I cloned again. Inserted my chages into the new tree and commited. This time it was ok. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf: 2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de Meanwhile the html-creation should include the images. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de Only 3 out of 9 images are copied. focus-stack-decision-tree.png local-analysis-window.png photographic-workflow.png yes, I already found out too. The other group is created differently, I forgot to include them too. Corrected already. It should be commited in a few moments. W.r.t. both the pdf's and html's: Christoph's versioning is not working (yet). It now displays #define _CONFIG_COMPILER_H on the front page. Thansk so far for all your work! Harry Thanks for testing! Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
2009/9/26 Yuval Levy goo...@levy.ch Harry van der Wolf wrote: Note that the OpenGL utility toolkit and the OpenGL library are default available frameworks on OSX (GLUT and OpenGL). I'm not sure whether leaving it out or adding it will create extra confusion confusion IMO. Mentioning the dependencies (as is now) is probably a good compromise. For more detail users can be referred to the wiki pages with a link to http://wiki.panotools.org/Development_of_Open_Source_tools#Build_your_Own_Test_Builds I would be inclined to reduce everything to a single line linking there (and improve the dependencies section on that wiki page). Yuv OK. Fine with me. Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: image date display error? Yes, but... (was: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation)
2009/9/25 Gerry Patterson thedeepvo...@gmail.com On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Harry van der Wolf hvdw...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/9/24 Bruno Postle br...@postle.net On Thu 24-Sep-2009 at 08:54 -0700, grow wrote: I have gone back and checked and my TIFF files do have both dates. If we are only going to have one date I would prefer the shooting date rather than the date the file was written out ... That sounds like a bug, could you add it to the tracker? The original english label says Capture Date and as such that label is incorrect, but it depends on what you want to see. Exif data contains three image dates: - File Modification Date/Time - Date/Time Original - Create Date Hugin displays the File Modification Date/Time and as such this is a bug. My preference would be to show the Create Date and call that Capture date (as that's correct behaviour). But it should also show the File Modification Date/Time and name it accordingly. Date/Time Original can be used if you make copies of images. Aperture changes this File Modification Date/Time when you (in this case George) make modifications to an image. If you use exiftool imagename.tif you will see what I mean. Note also the Aperture's behaviour is correct. In fact every image program that doesn't do this is not working correct. Harry Hello, I have commited a fix to show the correct date for Capture Date as was intended. Trunk ,Rev 4484. I'll look into adding a second date field for the File Modification Date/Time Best Regards, - Gerry Thanks Gerry, It works fine. I've got another request. When working with stacks, it would be nice if the Exposure Compensation would be displayed as well in the Images pane. Exiv2 calls that Exposure bias like Exposure bias : -2 EV and uses ExposureBiasValue as variable. For me that's an even more important one than the photo date. (Perhaps I should register a feature request, but I don't know if I do a very simple request or a difficult request. Please let me know if you want me to file a feature request for this.) Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf: Stupid, stupid, stupid. Not stupid. This is, what every one knows from own (in my case very often made) experience. By now I use a script to wipe enblend, clone, create build dir, export some CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS, run cmake, run make. I forgot to add the -DNOSPLIT=ON It works correctly now. Glad to hear. Thanks for all your work. You made it work. Without you, I would not have looked again into it. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
2009/9/24 Bruno Postle br...@postle.net The release notes for the imminent 2009.2.0 release are here: http://hugin.sourceforge.net/releases/2009.2.0/ I would appreciate some proof-reading, does it make sense? Now would be a good time to do translations too. -- Bruno Hi Bruno, Sorry for responding this late, but I only now stumble upon the line: For users compiling from source: note that the minimum version of * wxWidgets* supported is now 2.7.0, libpano13 needs to be at least 2.9.14, and that Hugin now requires *GLEW* the OpenGL Extension Wrangler Library, * freeglut* the OpenGL utility toolkit, and *libGLU* the OpenGL utility library. This should actually say something like: For users compiling from source: note that the minimum version of * wxWidgets* supported is now 2.7.0, libpano13 needs to be at least 2.9.14, and that Hugin now requires *GLEW* the OpenGL Extension Wrangler Library, * freeglut* the OpenGL utility toolkit, and *libGLU* the OpenGL utility library. Note that the OpenGL utility toolkit and the OpenGL library are default available frameworks on OSX (GLUT and OpenGL). I'm not sure whether leaving it out or adding it will create extra confusion: beginner compilers might try to compile freeglut and opengl on OSX instead of using the default available frameworks, where experienced compilers might think: duh, off course, why mentioning it. I prefer having it in the release notes though as also experienced compilers might think: OK, but why not using the default frameworks?, but that's exactly what cmake does on OSX. Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: (Probably very basic) help needed for build process on WinXP: missing files?
Yuval Levy schrieb: Hallo Joachim, J. Schneider wrote: it would be a nice idea to try building hugin myself. good idea! I'll be happy to mentor you. would it be OK for you, in exchange for the mentoring, to use your experience and improve the Wiki instructions? I'd be glad to help there. I assume you're on http://wiki.panotools.org/Build_Hugin_for_Windows_with_SDK Yes. If it is OK for you, I suggest we do this mentoring session live on this mailing list, so others can profit too. That's fine for me. I created the directory D:\huginbase\enblend Cloned the repository, result D:\huginbase\enblend\enblend. this means that you installed all the tools, as well as Guido's SDK? I did. Just not wxWidgets that you mention later. Should this also be in the list of tools to install? I downloaded it and installed it to C:\Programme\wxWidgets-2.8.10. Now I opened enblend_msvc2003.sln. what version of Visual Studio do you have? the file to open is open huginbase/enblend/enblend_msvc2008.sln I have Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition. I just didn't look closely enough. Now I took ...2008.sln. (But that doesn't change the result.) Strangely it cannot be opened by double clicking, but when dragged onto the MSVC window it works. the repository is currently in a broken state - a recent change breaks the MSVC (and the new CMake) build. Only autotools works. I don't know what autotools is, but I follow your steps to revert back to the unbroken stage. the workaround is to step a little bit back in time, ... This will bring your enblend tree back in time. Now you can continue with the build. Done. Update to revision is the command in my TortoiseHG installation. And 523 the rev. no. Changed the target configuration to 'release'. There should be multiple configurations. ... If you have a good GPU, you may try to build the version with GPU. And if you often run out of disk space, build the version without ImageCache. Also if your CPU supports SSE2, build the version with SSE2. For example you can build Release SSE2,GPU. The GPU option doesn't work with my Intel 945 Chipset but I needn't use it and I guess my Core2Duo T5500 (1.66GHz) supports SSE2, so Release SSE2,GPU is what I chose. *but* before doing this, you need to complete the SDK. The current SDK lacks some of the dependencies to build enblend. OK, this should be included in the wiki unless it is not fixed in the SDK. IIRC it is lcms that is missing (or outdated; 1.17 in the SDK and 1.18 referred to from the MSVC project files). Looks like missing. In D:\huginbase\enblend I don't find any lcms*.* file. * download the source from http://www.littlecms.com/lcms-1.18a.zip * unpack inside the SDK folder So I have D:\huginbase\enblend containing enblend\ ... No, I think first I throw all that stuff from D:\huginbase\enblend\enblend\*.* one level up and resync it to be sure. OK, now I have D:\huginbase\enblend\ with the enblend repository .hg in it and D:\huginbase\lcms-1.18\. Probably I should move it inside ...\enblend. - D:\huginbase\enblend\lcms-1.18\. * inside lcms-1.18 there is a Projects folder. Select the MSVC2008 project. Start it. * in the configuration manager, select to build lcms only. You do not need the other tools (that will raise an error because they don't find some dependencies) This results in D:\huginbase\enblend\lcms-1.18\Projects\VC2008\LibRelease\*obj and ...\vc90.idb and a log with 0 errors and 41 warnings like ..\..\src\cmsio1.c(964) : warning C4063: case -1804014080 ist kein gültiger Wert für den Schalter der Enumeration icTagTypeSignature. d:\huginbase\lcms-1.18\include\icc34.h(352): Siehe Deklaration von 'icTagTypeSignature' once you built lcms, continue with building enblend. Do I understand correctly that MSVC should realize wxWidgets is installed and use the TIFF/JPEG/PNG libraries from there? Obviously not. MSVC still complains. If I understood the output Die temporäre Datei d:\huginbase\enblend\src\vigra_impex\Release (GPU, SSE2)\RSP0160562384.rsp wird erstellt. Inhalt: [ /Ox /Ob2 /Oi /Ot /GL /I ..\..\..\STLport-trunk\stlport /I ..\include /I ..\..\include /I ..\..\..\tiff-3.8.2\libtiff /I ..\..\..\wxWidgets-2.8.10\src\jpeg /I ..\..\..\wxWidgets-2.8.10\src\png /I ..\..\..\wxWidgets-2.8.10\src\zlib /I ..\..\..\boost_1_39_0 /I ..\..\..\lcms-1.17\include /I ..\..\..\libxmi-1.2 /I . /I ..\..\..\Deploy\include /D VIGRA_STATIC_LIB /D WIN32 /D NDEBUG /D _LIB /D HasTIFF /D HasJPEG /D HasPNG /D HasEXR /D _WIN32 /D _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE /D _VC80_UPGRADE=0x0710 /D _MBCS /FD /EHsc /MT /GS- /arch:SSE2 /FoRelease (GPU, SSE2)\\ /FdRelease (GPU, SSE2)\vc90.pdb /W3 /c /Wp64 /Zi /TP /wd4251 .\tiff.cxx correctly I would probably be able to move my dirctoy wxWidgets-2.8.10 (now in C:\Programme\wxWidgets-2.8.10) in the right place. ..\..\..\wxW... is counting from where? Tried moving it to D:\wxWidgets-2.8.10 and to D:\huginbase\enblend\wxWidgets-2.8.10
[hugin-ptx] Re: it works!
Has anyone tried this with length of buildings down a block? I'd like to photograph and stitch our downtown area into one long photo for a project I'm looking at. I can provide photos. If there is a certain technique I need, please advise. I've tried twice, only with mixed success. From: d...@uvic.ca To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com; panotools-de...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [hugin-ptx] it works! Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 03:25:30 -0700 The spherical model of libpano places some constraints on the Tr model, but with few adaptions it works. This is 11 photos taken along a narrow alley. the stair effect will show you where those photos are: http://turingmachine.org/~dmg/temp/wall.jpg -- -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . _ Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage_062009 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf:
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko:
This command could then include ${SPLIT_OPTION} with either
--no-split
or
Harry
OK Harry, but should we do with the already created directory e.g.
enblend.html?
I try to create enblend_file.html and install later as enblend.html.
Done.
Kornel
I just tried, but where do I find this enblend_file.html or
enfuse_file.html or the final versions?
When running make I can't find them and with running make package I can't
find them either.
Strange. (But maybe -DNOSPLIT=ON forgotten. Default is NOSPLIT=OFF)
make package creates e.g.
BuildDir/doc/enblend_file.html
When I install (with dpkg -i ...) I find
/usr/local/doc/enblend/enblend.html
Harry
I added some more dependencies. I would try again.
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Harry van der Wolf:
...
One more item on my wishlist is to have the --no-split option back when
creating html documentation. It could be something like -DNOSPLIT=1 and it
will only be interpreted if -DDOC=1 has been set too.
You have the command COMMAND ${MAKEINFO_EXE} --html
--css-include=${TOP_SRC_DIR}/doc/default.css.
This command could then include ${SPLIT_OPTION} with either --no-split
or
Harry
OK Harry, but should we do with the already created directory e.g. enblend.html?
I try to create enblend_file.html and install later as enblend.html.
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko:
This command could then include ${SPLIT_OPTION} with either
--no-split
or
Harry
OK Harry, but should we do with the already created directory e.g.
enblend.html?
I try to create enblend_file.html and install later as enblend.html.
Done.
Kornel
I just tried, but where do I find this enblend_file.html or enfuse_file.html
or the final versions?
When running make I can't find them and with running make package I can't
find them either.
Harry
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
On Sat 26-Sep-2009 at 00:49 +0200, J. Schneider wrote: GPS would be very useful if available. Inside hugin I wouldn't need it, but I would like it to be transferred to the final pano. This should already happen, is it broken? Useful for me: - ISO - focal length multiplier (though available on Lens tab) - File date AND capture date I find sensible, too. -- 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko:
This command could then include ${SPLIT_OPTION} with either --no-split
or
Harry
OK Harry, but should we do with the already created directory e.g.
enblend.html?
I try to create enblend_file.html and install later as enblend.html.
Done.
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: fonction0 in boost is not included from the correct place with debian
2009/9/26 Andreas Metzler ametz...@downhill.at.eu.org Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh) jean.luc.cou...@gmail.com wrote: I've updated debian sid. In the update, all boost related stuff changed to version 1.40.0 In libboost1.40-dev, function0.hpp is located in /usr/include/boost/ function/function0.hpp ./src/hugin_base/vigra_ext/ImageTransforms.h has to be adjusted to include the correct path. Hello, looks like the problem is that in previous boost releases boost/thread/thread.hpp already #included boost/function.hpp. I think this is easily fixed by unconditionally doing the #include. (After this patch hugin still builds against boost 1.34.1 on Linux while not failing to build with boost 1.40. cu andreas Same here with 1.38 and 1.40. Committed to trunk. Thanks. Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Don Holeman wrote: Maybe you should also ask at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon_EOS_dSLR/ I would assume such a group to have, on average, a biased opinion and I am not looking for fan answers. Actually the best feedback I got so far is from Nikon users :) My approach is applications-oriented, not brand oriented. The brand put some limits on me based on my prior investment in the gear from the brand, but as I stated, I am open for other brands as well if they make sense (and Pentax is difficult to ignore, but the budget becomes an issue as I would start from scratch). Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de
Am Samstag 26 September 2009 schrieb Kornel Benko:
W.r.t. both the pdf's and html's: Christoph's versioning is not working
(yet). It now displays #define _CONFIG_COMPILER_H on the front page.
Corrected now. Thanks.
Kornel
--
Kornel Benko
kornel.be...@berlin.de
Yes, it works for both html and pdf. Thanks.
One more item on my wishlist is to have the --no-split option back when
creating html documentation. It could be something like -DNOSPLIT=1 and it
will only be interpreted if -DDOC=1 has been set too.
You have the command COMMAND ${MAKEINFO_EXE} --html
--css-include=${TOP_SRC_DIR}/doc/default.css.
This command could then include ${SPLIT_OPTION} with either --no-split or
Harry
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
Harry van der Wolf wrote: Note that the OpenGL utility toolkit and the OpenGL library are default available frameworks on OSX (GLUT and OpenGL). I'm not sure whether leaving it out or adding it will create extra confusion confusion IMO. Mentioning the dependencies (as is now) is probably a good compromise. For more detail users can be referred to the wiki pages with a link to http://wiki.panotools.org/Development_of_Open_Source_tools#Build_your_Own_Test_Builds I would be inclined to reduce everything to a single line linking there (and improve the dependencies section on that wiki page). Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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] it works!
The spherical model of libpano places some constraints on the Tr model, but with few adaptions it works. This is 11 photos taken along a narrow alley. the stair effect will show you where those photos are: http://turingmachine.org/~dmg/temp/wall.jpg -- -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Creation of doc's with cmake should work now
2009/9/26 Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de Strange. (But maybe -DNOSPLIT=ON forgotten. Default is NOSPLIT=OFF) Stupid, stupid, stupid. By now I use a script to wipe enblend, clone, create build dir, export some CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS, run cmake, run make. I forgot to add the -DNOSPLIT=ON It works correctly now. Thanks for all your work. Harry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
What do you need the high FPS for Yuv? If you're on a cropped sensor I'd say the logical upgrade is to full frame, particularly as you'll get a lot more width for shooting panos, so 5Dmark2 or D700 (although a D700x/s is rumoured). Too help fund it you could also sell your video camera and just use the SLR for movies too. Tim 2009/9/26 RueiKe ruei...@yahoo.com What type of bracketing capabilities do the A850D and the 7D have? I heard that the Canons have only a max of 3 steps, but maybe this is only consumer level. The Nikons support 3, 5, 7, and 9 steps at a max increment of 1EV, while I heard that Pentax supports 2EV increments, but only 3 steps. Have you considered the Nikon D3 (or D700)? It has excellent high ISO noise performance and prices have really come down. Next question would be what is the best lens for high resolution panos? I am using the Voigtlander 20mm Color Skopar almost exclusively now. Very compact and great CA performance. Regards, Rick On Sep 26, 10:45 am, Yuval Levy goo...@levy.ch wrote: Hi all, This time I *must* upgrade my kit. It's a requirement for a job I landed and the budget pays for it. HDR, partial panoramas, long focal distance. I currently use a Canon 350D. From the pre-digital era I am a long time Minolta user and have some good glass, flash, accessories. In the meantime Minolta sold to SONY and the Alpha 850 seems a nice proposition (with reservation about the brand. The memory stick stuff is pathetic). My 350D kit was used mainly for the production of web-based material, particularly full spherical panoramas (7000x3500). It's still the old Sigma 8mm F/4, complemented with very cheap Sigma APS-C lenses just to have something in the range up to 200mm for the occasional use (and with Hugin I can nicely correct them to perfect rectilinear). Besides the specific job, my interests have shifted to higher resolutions (large prints) and partial multi-row panoramas for large prints, so I will want better glass than I have now in the range of 20mm-200mm. I still do web-based full sphericals occasionally and if I had to change something for that application it would rather be the lens than the camera body. From my starting point I'd have to shell out more money on the Canon to reach the same quality of glass as on the SONY (and if I did, I could as well go 5D MkII?) - and that extra money is not in the budget. The body (including 5D MkII if I wanted) is. What I like about the 7D is 8FPS continuous mode and 1.0x viewfinder magnification. The a850 has only 3FPS (but is full frame, and the a900, which I also could still get through the budget, has 5FPS which is better than the 5D MkII). What worries me a little about the a850 (and a900) is the noise at high ISO (compared to the 5D MkII). But isn't that an even bigger problem for the 7D (with 18mpx crammed on an APS-C sensor)? Anybody has some experience in low light with the SONYs? Exposure Bracketing seems to be a weakness of both contenders. I had considered a Pentax K-7, but that would be a completely new system with plenty of components to buy right from the start, not just the body. And there would be other brands and models to consider too. I am open for suggestions. Has anybody made any experience with SONY Alpha 550 and its HDR mode? but anyway, it is not present on the a850 (nor on the a950). Which brings me back to the original choice: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850? Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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] buliding panomatic fails on Ubuntu 9.10 / AMD64
it builds on Ubuntu 9.04 and my 32bit dyno-book. but on my 64bit box it fails with the following error: In file included from ./tclap/UnlabeledValueArg.h:30, from tclap/CmdLine.h:28, from main.cpp:25: ./tclap/ValueArg.h: In member function ‘int TCLAP::VALUE_ARG_HELPER::ValueExtractorT::extractValue(const std::string)’: ./tclap/ValueArg.h:103: error: ‘EOF’ was not declared in this scope In file included from ./tclap/UnlabeledMultiArg.h:29, from tclap/CmdLine.h:29, from main.cpp:25: ./tclap/MultiArg.h: In member function ‘int TCLAP::MULTI_ARG_HELPER::ValueExtractorT::extractValue(const std::string)’: ./tclap/MultiArg.h:103: error: ‘EOF’ was not declared in this scope In file included from PanoDetector.h:31, from main.cpp:32: ../zthread/include/zthread/PoolExecutor.h: At global scope: ../zthread/include/zthread/PoolExecutor.h:58: warning: ‘ZThread::PoolExecutor’ has a field ‘ZThread::PoolExecutor::_impl’ whose type uses the anonymous namespace make[1]: *** [main.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/yuv/src/panomatic/panomatic-0.9.4/panomatic' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 any idea? Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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] issue with libpano13 CMake build (SVN1082)
today seems to be my lucky day: $ cmake ../libpano13 -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local -DCPACK_BINARY_DEB:BOOL=ON -DCPACK_BINARY_NSIS:BOOL=OFF \ -DCPACK_BINARY_RPM:BOOL=OFF -DCPACK_BINARY_STGZ:BOOL=OFF -DCPACK_BINARY_TBZ2:BOOL=OFF \ -DCPACK_BINARY_TGZ:BOOL=OFF -DCPACK_BINARY_TZ:BOOL=OFF -- found version = 2.9.15 -- svnversion = /usr/bin/svnversion -- Configuring done -- Generating done -- Build files have been written to: /home/yuv/src/libpano/bdir y...@yuv-desktop:~/src/libpano/bdir$ make package [ 0%] Built target man [ 1%] Building C object CMakeFiles/pano13.dir/adjust.c.o /home/yuv/src/libpano/libpano13/adjust.c:44:22: error: PTcommon.h: No such file or directory make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/pano13.dir/adjust.c.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/pano13.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 the autotools build works fine. IIRC I did already build the CMake version on this same box. It would be nice if the CMake build would be maintained equally well as the autotools (or actually: drop the autotools, it's redundant). Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
On Fri 25-Sep-2009 at 21:12 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote: If we were a commercial endeavour with marketing pazzazz, I would withhold the code release until the release notes are ready in 47 languages If we did marketing, then we would have a full press release with everything a journalist needs to assemble an article: Quotes from users, quotes from developers, screenshots, nice hi-res panoramas etc... Hugin is probably a very easy thing to get into magazines as it is so visual. -- 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Tim Nugent wrote: What do you need the high FPS for Yuv? fast moving subjects. action! If you're on a cropped sensor I'd say the logical upgrade is to full frame not necessarily. for spherical panoramas FF has less angular resolution at equal megapixel count. that said, full frame is very attractive to me, coming from the 35mm film background, I miss the shallow depth of field effect, e.g. in portraits. sell your video camera and just use the SLR for movies too. not yet. the current crop of SLRs are no good for movie making. They need a tiltable LCD display first. Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Hi Rick, RueiKe wrote: What type of bracketing capabilities do the A850D and the 7D have? the usual, plain, boring -2/0/+2 AEB. there are, of course, workarounds, but I am really fed up of camera manufacturers not understanding such a basic need and implementing such a simple function as for a= -x to +x shoot a picture increase the exposure value a=a+y next and let the user define x and y through the UI. x=2 and y=2 is what Canon does. x=6 and y=2 is what I'd like to do in many cases. heard that the Canons have only a max of 3 steps, but maybe this is only consumer level. no, it's overall. I would call it engineer's deafness. The Nikons support 3, 5, 7, and 9 steps at a max increment of 1EV, while I heard that Pentax supports 2EV increments, the 1EV steps is what disturbs me with Nikon. creates a lot of unnecessary junk. so they fixed y at 1. Pentax has IMO the so far best implementation, but is also limited (reduced x range). Have you considered the Nikon D3 (or D700)? It has excellent high ISO noise performance and prices have really come down. I've looked at Nikon too, yes. I have good (as in: similar to Canon; and not as in: how I would expect a customer-centric business to operate) experience with the brand (I own a Nikonos V with plenty of accessories). I end up coming back to the Canon or SONY choice because I already have lenses and moving to Nikon, Pentax, or any other contender would break the budget. I am not inclined to top up at this point. Next question would be what is the best lens for high resolution panos? I am using the Voigtlander 20mm Color Skopar almost exclusively now. Very compact and great CA performance. indeed the question of the lens comes even before the body. If this was web resolution full spherical, I would not consider a full frame sensor; and I would consider the 7D to be an overkill (no need for such a great viewfinder; and 18mpx on an APS-C is overkill for the softness of the current generation of fisheye lenses). For this specific work I'll be shooting in the 100mm to 200mm range - pano being a synonymous with composite or mosaic more than with wide field of view. And my good old Minolta AF 100-300mm F4.5-5.6 (APO D) fits the bill. The SONY body would add stabilization to it. Adding a comparable lens to a Canon or Nikon system would set me back of more than 1000$. I could justify the 1000$ on a Canon lens coupled with the 7D because the 7D fits in my existing system. The project's budget itself justifies the body only, which in the case of the Alpha 850 would give me the option to resell it with my good Minolta glasses and accessories after the project ended if I did not like them for whatever reason. What entices me is a full frame sensor - because of the increased depth of field control. I've recently allowed myself the luxury of exposing a 35mm film and it feels so gd. But going full frame on Canon is not really an option at this moment; and even less Nikon. Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Yuval I would assume such a group to have, on average, a biased opinion and I Yuval am not looking for fan answers. Actually the best feedback I got so far Yuval is from Nikon users :) Hi Yuv, Most of use are biased... because we don't use both cameras most of the time. I personally like Canon lenses. They are superb, and long term investments. My EF 85 1.8, my second Canon lens, still makes amazing photos 15 years later (I know, I know, some people use older lenses, but that is my point: lenses are long term investment). Of course, what lenses you get depends on your budget. Canon does not make many cheap great lenses (one the EF 50 1.8 mkII, which should be owned by anybody who does not have a more expensive 50mm). Look at the innovation in the new TS-E lenses, or the new 100 macro coming out soon. That does not mean I like Canon per-se. They hold technology to maximize their return. By the way, the 1ds3 is capable of doing 7 brackets at once, I think. I personally think the differences in sensors are there, but they are usually small compared to other tangibles, such as lenses you have, your shooting style, and how comfortable you feel with each camera. After all, most of the photos we make could be equally be recorded with any of the sensors in the 1.6 or full frame SLR cameras in the market. What matters more often is you can control the camera to make the shot before it vanishes. -- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org/ http://silvernegative.com/ dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
sebastien delcoigne wrote: Sounds like a good idea, eventhough it prevents passers-by like me from contributing a translation. the backup is to tell what you have to say here. some of the longer terms contributors may pick it up and it will land in the wiki. Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: 2009.2.0 release notes proof-reading/trnaslation
Bruno Postle wrote: On Fri 25-Sep-2009 at 21:12 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote: If we were a commercial endeavour with marketing pazzazz, I would withhold the code release until the release notes are ready in 47 languages If we did marketing, then we would have a full press release with everything a journalist needs to assemble an article: Quotes from users, quotes from developers, screenshots, nice hi-res panoramas etc... Hugin is probably a very easy thing to get into magazines as it is so visual. i still prefer not to do marketing, not to deal with the press, and just have fun together :-) Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: [Press] LWN The Grumpy Editor's hugin experience
Andreas Metzler wrote: Hello, FYI lwn.net has posted a hugin review as part of the grumpy editor's series on http://lwn.net/Articles/351053/. It is subscriber content only currently but will be freely accessible after a week. The editor wasn't very grumpy though, the article ends with It definitely belongs on any Linux-using photographer's system. this is an example of why I prefer not to have to deal with the press. what a crappy article, very badly researched, full of mistakes. and the whoole comments flow. I better count to ten and repeat to myself that I don't care, I don't care, I don't care. Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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] horizontal / vertical orientation - limitation
Hi all I've run a bunch of randomly taken photos through panomatic. It identifies control points properly. however some of them are in landscape orientation and others in portrait. when I try to load them in Hugin, the following happens: MainFrame::RestoreLayoutOnNextResize() ERROR: 16:45:47.279947 (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/hugin_base/panodata/Panorama.cpp:2380) loadPTScript(): Landscape and portrait images can't share a lens error on script line 3224: ERROR: 16:45:47.299699 (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/hugin_base/panodata/Panorama.cpp:2380) loadPTScript(): Landscape and portrait images can't share a lens error on script line 3224: ERROR: 16:45:47.300454 (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/hugin_base/panodata/Panorama.cpp:2380) loadPTScript(): Landscape and portrait images can't share a lens error on script line 3224: ERROR: 16:45:47.301135 (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/hugin_base/panodata/Panorama.cpp:2380) loadPTScript(): Landscape and portrait images can't share a lens error on script line 3224: Number of images 20 ContractViolation: Precondition violation! Unable to open file ''. (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/foreign/vigra/vigra_impex/codecmanager.cxx:206) FATAL: 16:45:47.857914 (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/hugin_base/huginapp/ImageCache.cpp:653) getImage(): (): Error during image reading: Precondition violation! Unable to open file ''. (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/foreign/vigra/vigra_impex/codecmanager.cxx:206) terminate called after throwing an instance of 'vigra::PreconditionViolation' what(): Precondition violation! Unable to open file ''. (/home/yuv/src/hugin/trunk/src/foreign/vigra/vigra_impex/codecmanager.cxx:206) Aborted will the new layout mode be more flexible about the orientation of the same lens? is there anything else we can do to make Hugin work with the same lens, once in landscape and once in portrait? Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: horizontal / vertical orientation - limitation
On Sat 26-Sep-2009 at 16:51 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote: will the new layout mode be more flexible about the orientation of the same lens? I think it has a bugfix where hugin would successfully load such a project, but landscape and portrait images would still be different 'lenses'. The solution is: don't rotate part of your photo set before stitching. is there anything else we can do to make Hugin work with the same lens, once in landscape and once in portrait? In the panotools model a landscape and portrait image are fundamentally different. -- 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: tilt functions
From a purely empirical point of view, it appears that there is some
undesirable linkage between these parameters that makes the
minimization process get trapped into local minima and have difficulty
finding a solution in some cases.
My basis for saying that is that I've been running some test cases of
photos of a plane taken from a constant at varying angles, starting
from overhead (from a height of 1.5m) and then moving in one direction
a fixed step size (about 0.3m). Each photo was centered on the same
point and the resulting pitch changed by about 10º per photo. ASC
and panomatic both found lots of control points easily and I pruned
out any bad ones. Optimizing the result turned out to be more
difficult than I expected with the relatively clean data. I was
optimizing y,p,r,TrX,TrY,TrZ for eight of the frames and the ninth
one, the overhead one, was left fixed with 0 values for these
parameters. What I saw was wildly different results in the output
after small changes. For example, PToptimizer would give an RMS error
of ~15 from one starting point and then I would delete one of the
control points (there were over 400) and then end up with a completely
different result with an error of ~5. Other small changes resulted in
results that approx. equal RMS error but very different solutions.
It seemed that there was a tradeoff occurring between the value of p
and the value of Tz. In some solutions p would vary considerably (0
to 58) and seem about right, with Tr{X,Y,Z} varying between 0 and
0.18. Another solution, with similar error, kept p between -7 and +7,
but Tr{X,Y,Z} varying from 0 to 3.6.
I also experimented with varying d,e (it seems that letting them vary
per-image doesn't help anything which is consistent with Pablo's
explanation), and jointly optimizing with some of the lens parameters
(a,b,c). In the latter case, the optimization usually fell apart
completely with RMS errors 20.
The bottom line is that although I could eventually find a solution
which seems good, I felt that the sensitivity to small changes in the
optimizer's ability to find a good solution makes it difficult to
solve the system and also makes it hard to know when the solution is
good. It may just be that the solution space with these parameters
is quite bumpy and prone to local minima, but it may also be that the
parameter choice results in high correlations between some of the
parameters.
Brent
On Sep 24, 11:39 am, Pablo d'Angelo pablo.dang...@web.de wrote:
Jim Watters schrieb:
Pablo d'Angelo wrote:
If I understand correctly both models will align an image so it is on
the same plane as others.
After some more reading of the code, I'm quite sure that the tilt can
only work well with rectilinear input images. If only that case is
interesting, one doesn't even need angles, a simple 3x3 homography
matrix transform is sufficient, and probably more stable than the tilt
model.
The XYZ model calculates the position of the camera, this will cause
certain distortions to the image. XYZ have to be optimized with ypr.
The TxTyTzTs model calculates the actual distortion to align the image
after it has been placed correctly after optimizing ypr.
I don't believe that ypr and the TxTyTzTs are independent. For the shift
compensation, the TxTyTzTs model will also require simultanious
optimisation of d and e.
The advantage to the XYZ model is it uses fewer overall parameters.
But when I try imagine manipulating images in my head using TxTyTzTs i
don't see how Tz is any different than r. And maybe Tz it is not
necessary. The advantage to the TxTyTs model is ypr can be optimized
first to get a good placement before distorting the image by optimizing
TxTyTs overall needing fewer control points.
You still need Tx, Ty, Ts and d,e. This assumes that you do not need to
touch y,p,r from a previous optimisation. However, I think y,p,r will
try to compensate for the parallax, and they will thus be quite wrong,
in an attempt to rescue the situation. I'm not sure that a later tilt
estimation works satisfactory with the previously estimated y,p,r
parameters. Maybe one can get away, if the camera hasn't been moved too far.
My experience with the tilt model was not so good. I have prepared a
nice testset with the aerial images posted earlier, and it works quite
well with the XYZ mode. I'll give more details later.
ciao
Pablo
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Hi Yuv, Definitely disappointing that camera manufacturers still have not caught on to increased dynamic range work yet. Even external camera control software, which should have a lot more flexibility, doesn't address the need (at least for Nikon). Another aspect of bracketing that would be a factor for me would be the ability to lock up the mirror for an entire bracket series. Is it really necessary to meter between brackets, especially in manual mode? Is there some other technical limitation for this? Rick On Sep 27, 4:26 am, Yuval Levy goo...@levy.ch wrote: Hi Rick, RueiKe wrote: What type of bracketing capabilities do the A850D and the 7D have? the usual, plain, boring -2/0/+2 AEB. there are, of course, workarounds, but I am really fed up of camera manufacturers not understanding such a basic need and implementing such a simple function as for a= -x to +x shoot a picture increase the exposure value a=a+y next and let the user define x and y through the UI. x=2 and y=2 is what Canon does. x=6 and y=2 is what I'd like to do in many cases. heard that the Canons have only a max of 3 steps, but maybe this is only consumer level. no, it's overall. I would call it engineer's deafness. The Nikons support 3, 5, 7, and 9 steps at a max increment of 1EV, while I heard that Pentax supports 2EV increments, the 1EV steps is what disturbs me with Nikon. creates a lot of unnecessary junk. so they fixed y at 1. Pentax has IMO the so far best implementation, but is also limited (reduced x range). Have you considered the Nikon D3 (or D700)? It has excellent high ISO noise performance and prices have really come down. I've looked at Nikon too, yes. I have good (as in: similar to Canon; and not as in: how I would expect a customer-centric business to operate) experience with the brand (I own a Nikonos V with plenty of accessories). I end up coming back to the Canon or SONY choice because I already have lenses and moving to Nikon, Pentax, or any other contender would break the budget. I am not inclined to top up at this point. Next question would be what is the best lens for high resolution panos? I am using the Voigtlander 20mm Color Skopar almost exclusively now. Very compact and great CA performance. indeed the question of the lens comes even before the body. If this was web resolution full spherical, I would not consider a full frame sensor; and I would consider the 7D to be an overkill (no need for such a great viewfinder; and 18mpx on an APS-C is overkill for the softness of the current generation of fisheye lenses). For this specific work I'll be shooting in the 100mm to 200mm range - pano being a synonymous with composite or mosaic more than with wide field of view. And my good old Minolta AF 100-300mm F4.5-5.6 (APO D) fits the bill. The SONY body would add stabilization to it. Adding a comparable lens to a Canon or Nikon system would set me back of more than 1000$. I could justify the 1000$ on a Canon lens coupled with the 7D because the 7D fits in my existing system. The project's budget itself justifies the body only, which in the case of the Alpha 850 would give me the option to resell it with my good Minolta glasses and accessories after the project ended if I did not like them for whatever reason. What entices me is a full frame sensor - because of the increased depth of field control. I've recently allowed myself the luxury of exposing a 35mm film and it feels so gd. But going full frame on Canon is not really an option at this moment; and even less Nikon. Yuv --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Definitely disappointing that camera manufacturers still have not caught on to increased dynamic range work yet. Even external camera control software, which should have a lot more flexibility, doesn't address the need (at least for Nikon). Another aspect of bracketing that would be a factor for me would be the ability to lock up the mirror for an entire bracket series. Is it really necessary to meter between brackets, especially in manual mode? Is there some other technical limitation for this? the 5dII does this when you enable live view. -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Pentax has IMO the so far best implementation, but is also limited (reduced x range). My (outdated) K10D makes 5 steps of 2EV maximum. Joachim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: tilt functions
The bottom line is that although I could eventually find a solution which seems good, I felt that the sensitivity to small changes in the optimizer's ability to find a good solution makes it difficult to solve the system and also makes it hard to know when the solution is good. It may just be that the solution space with these parameters is quite bumpy and prone to local minima, but it may also be that the parameter choice results in high correlations between some of the parameters. I fully agree. Although I don't quite understand the optimizer, I believe it does not discriminate on which parameters are more important. ANother problem is that a bad control point might be nicely optimized (small error) and increase error in better points. I would really like to be able to say: I know this control is good, so minimize the error of this point at the expense of others that I am not so sure about. Brent On Sep 24, 11:39 am, Pablo d'Angelo pablo.dang...@web.de wrote: Jim Watters schrieb: Pablo d'Angelo wrote: If I understand correctly both models will align an image so it is on the same plane as others. After some more reading of the code, I'm quite sure that the tilt can only work well with rectilinear input images. If only that case is interesting, one doesn't even need angles, a simple 3x3 homography matrix transform is sufficient, and probably more stable than the tilt model. The XYZ model calculates the position of the camera, this will cause certain distortions to the image. XYZ have to be optimized with ypr. The TxTyTzTs model calculates the actual distortion to align the image after it has been placed correctly after optimizing ypr. I don't believe that ypr and the TxTyTzTs are independent. For the shift compensation, the TxTyTzTs model will also require simultanious optimisation of d and e. The advantage to the XYZ model is it uses fewer overall parameters. But when I try imagine manipulating images in my head using TxTyTzTs i don't see how Tz is any different than r. And maybe Tz it is not necessary. The advantage to the TxTyTs model is ypr can be optimized first to get a good placement before distorting the image by optimizing TxTyTs overall needing fewer control points. You still need Tx, Ty, Ts and d,e. This assumes that you do not need to touch y,p,r from a previous optimisation. However, I think y,p,r will try to compensate for the parallax, and they will thus be quite wrong, in an attempt to rescue the situation. I'm not sure that a later tilt estimation works satisfactory with the previously estimated y,p,r parameters. Maybe one can get away, if the camera hasn't been moved too far. My experience with the tilt model was not so good. I have prepared a nice testset with the aerial images posted earlier, and it works quite well with the XYZ mode. I'll give more details later. ciao Pablo -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: HELP...! Weird nadir color from Hugin 0.8.0
On Fri 25-Sep-2009 at 10:47 -0700, mh wrote: Since I started using Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard, I am getting very weird nadirs out of Hugin. I use only the images for the shots around to stitch a panorama. When I am satisfied, I add the nadir shot, add control points and optimize for the nadir shot only to get the nadir patch. It was working quite OK in version 0.7.0 but in version 0.8.0 I get very weird colors for the nadir part. The last try resulted in a completely destroyed nadir, I cannot see what is wrong. The reason why the nadir is white is because it has a different EV value to the rest of the images, presumably because exposure correction went wrong. Exposure correction will go badly wrong if the images are not well aligned in the first place. Looking at the project, the nadir also has wildly improbable values for lens distortion which seems to be because it has been given a different lens number and had all parameters optimised - Did hugin give it a different number or were you trying to do something with this shot? -- 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: issue with libpano13 CMake build (SVN1082)
Hullo Yuv, On Sep 27, 5:57 am, Yuval Levy goo...@levy.ch wrote: today seems to be my lucky day: [snip] y...@yuv-desktop:~/src/libpano/bdir$ make package [ 0%] Built target man [ 1%] Building C object CMakeFiles/pano13.dir/adjust.c.o /home/yuv/src/libpano/libpano13/adjust.c:44:22: error: PTcommon.h: No such file or directory [snip] IIRC I did already build the CMake version on this same box. It would be nice if the CMake build would be maintained equally well as the autotools (or actually: drop the autotools, it's redundant). I had a very similar problem trying to 'make package_source' on a Fedora system. It seems that the cmake stuff in libpano13 isn't finished, and the solution is to use `./configure make make dist`. Hope this helps. Cheers, Terry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
Hi Daniel, I just tried Live View on the D3. No impact on the mirror lock up. Too bad. At high speed, it can induce significant camera shake. Rick On Sep 27, 6:46 am, dmg d...@uvic.ca wrote: Definitely disappointing that camera manufacturers still have not caught on to increased dynamic range work yet. Even external camera control software, which should have a lot more flexibility, doesn't address the need (at least for Nikon). Another aspect of bracketing that would be a factor for me would be the ability to lock up the mirror for an entire bracket series. Is it really necessary to meter between brackets, especially in manual mode? Is there some other technical limitation for this? the 5dII does this when you enable live view. -- --dmg --- Daniel M. Germanhttp://turingmachine.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 04:21, Yuval Levy goo...@levy.ch wrote: Tim Nugent wrote: What do you need the high FPS for Yuv? fast moving subjects. action! So that wouldn't really be for taking panoramas I guess ^^ Also be carefull, sometimes it's written something like 7 images per seconds * and when you look at the * it says that you need the grip with the additional batteries, or else you'll shoot at 5 images per seconds... I can shoot at 3 img/s, and indeed in some cases I might want to shoot a little bit faster, when shooting sport events... that said, full frame is very attractive to me, coming from the 35mm film background, I miss the shallow depth of field effect, e.g. in portraits. I don't understand why using a FF you'll have a better shallow depth of field effet? I have a 50mm 1.4 (but a 1.8 would already be enough) and it gives me great portrait...honestly, I just *love* that lens, and I can always at once tell the difference from a picture taken with it compared to a picture taken with my 18-135 3.5-5.6 lens kit. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Canon 7D or SONY Alpha 850 - which one would you buy?
As for Canon VS Nikon lenses, unless you prefer a body from one or the other brand, I feel like Nikon bodies and lenses are more expensive...I still own a Nikon though and probably won't change because of the few lenses I already have. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
