[hugin-ptx] Re: Flipping Photos Review

[Yuval Levy]

Dale Beams wrote:
> Does Hugin have a "plug-in" module?

control point finders are a plug-in - hence when you say "Hugin finds 
points" you make a shortcut. you could be using autopano-sift-C, 
pan-o-matic, match-point or any other.

theoretically also the warping function is plug-in, but currently only 
nona is supported (adding PTmender should not be too difficult).

also for blending - although currently it is enblend and enfuse. there 
is a wrapper for smartblend.


> Download and add "panostart" as a plug-in and a gui button option get's 
> pulled in as well.

not the same "architecture". these are all plugins within the workflow, 
while panostart is to set up the beginning of a workflow. egg and 
chicken problem.

I don't think that adding a GUI to panostart is that difficult, but I 
also don't see it as a priority. it works well from the command line, 
and this is where the value is, simply because there are other steps 
that need to be scripted at the same time (such as RAW conversion).

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] Next GUI - take 2

[Yuval Levy]

Hi all,

I think it will take a few iterations, here is the next one. The 
"traditional preview vs. fast preview" was focused too much on one 
aspect of the whole - an important one, but we should not limit 
ourselves to that aspect - nor to the pseudo-workflow aspect of the 
current tabbed design of the main application window - when re-designing 
the GUI.

So I wipe out my drawing board and start from scratch again.

First, a word about my motives and how I intend to go about this.

I am scratching my own itch. If it is helpful for others, good. If not, 
that's OK too. I will try to avoid conflicts, which means that I will 
not commit to trunk things that have not been agreed - or if I'll do so 
I will start a development codeline.

My first objective is to articulate and develop a clear vision. It is 
better if it can be a common vision; and I appreciate everybody's 
opinion - particularly those that differ from mine because they widen up 
my thoughts and may show me aspects that I did not consider.

Once the vision is clear, I intend to go about implementing it. To me 
this is an exercise in learning wxWidgets and cross-platform GUI 
implementation.

Consensus is improbable (but not impossible) on such a broad topic 
loaded with subjectivity and preconceived notions; even more so when 
discussed at a hypothetical level. I thought whether I should run my 
thought process here in the open; or whether I should come up with 
another mockup, maybe even a functional one. I decided for the open, 
public approach because I believe that the view of a single individual 
is narrower than the view of a group. I look forward for *you* to 
influence my thought.

I'll first allow myself to say what I like. Then I will lay out the 
current state of my thinking.

I like (in order of priority):
* to use the largest possible part of the screen for preview, 
CP-editing, mask-editing, input-crop-editing.
* to control all aspects of the process down to the smallest detail and 
decide which part I delegate to automation and which one I override with 
manual intervention.
* to use the mouse the least possible.
* to use the keyboard the least possible.

There are many aspects to panorama-creation - many dimensions to look at 
things. The current application is workflow oriented. IMO this kind of 
aspect is secondary and should not determine the application's overall 
design.

There are two aspects that are central to me:
- the visual aspect (the input images and the output result)
- the control aspect (the transformations that these images undergo from 
input to output)

The workflow is merely a consequence of the two - it can be fully 
automated (in the case of the assisted workflow), or I can 
influence/control different aspects of it.

The current hierarchy of things put the workflow at the top (tabs). I 
actually never used that order. It is not that I dislike it, it is just 
not relevant (except with the 1/2/3 buttons on the assistant).

I do mainly two kind of manipulations through the Hugin GUI: 
visual-editing (V) and workflow-control (W). Currently they are mixed 
throughout the application's different windows: there is some V (like 
the CP-editor and crop tabs) in the main application tabbed interface 
which is mostly W; and there is some W (like the choice of output 
projection) in the preview window, which IMO should be V-only.

I would like Hugin to have two main windows, one V and one W. Some 
popups if warranted, although I'd make the CP list (just to name one 
popup) a tab in the W window.

On the (V)isual window I want the preview, the CP-tab; the crop tab; and 
in future the masking tab and all other visual work that depends on 
moving the mouse on the input images or output preview. What is common 
to them is that they need a large surface; and that I usually work on 
only one of them at a time. It could be tabbed, like Bruno started to 
articulate in the previous thread about the traditional preview.

On the (W)orkflow window I want to have all the text/numeric "manual" 
controls. What is common to them is that they have a logical sequence, 
but I end up jumping back and forth as I fine tune the workflow.

Some tasks can be done with both a visual or a manual control - e.g. 
dragging the final panorama crop visually or entering it manually. This 
is a user preference things and I believe both should be available - in 
the V and W window.

Right now we have unclear separation of V vs. W work, and this has 
detrimental consequences on the usage of display space.

I want to have the largest possible V-Window. I think most people do, 
although not always full screen. I'd like the development thrust to go 
toward reducing its chroma to a minimum. There are already too many 
controls on that window. Most users will open it in either full screen 
or near full screen.

Bruno expressed some interesting ideas of how the V-Window may possibly 
look, with the Compose/Crop/Layout/Slow tabs.

Things are a little bit mor

[hugin-ptx] Re: Flipping Photos Review

[Dale Beams]

Does Hugin have a "plug-in" module?

Download and add "panostart" as a plug-in and a gui button option get's pulled 
in as well.

I'm never one who'd advocate adding more code for bloat, but I've not stumbled 
across this before.  Now I know it's there I wouldn't have an issue dumping 5-6 
pano's into it a day.

Recently I've been looking at rigging a remote trigger for the camera, as I'm 
unable to keep it as steady as I need to for Hugin to find points on clear 
photos.  My photos can be a little blurry from time to time.

Dale 






> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:45:25 -0400
> From: goo...@levy.ch
> To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Flipping Photos Review
> 
> 
> Dale Beams wrote:
> > Has anyone else whose had flipping photo problems noticed this as well?
> 
> in the days before I started using Hugin I had two or three cases of 
> architectural panos with a lot of symmetry that fooled PTgui. I provided 
> one to Joost as a test case.
> 
> 
> > This would be yet another reason to be able to set a sequence order, etc. 
> > etc.
> 
> I think with the new layout it will be possible. Also the recently 
> introduced statistical cleaning of CP might help, although in cases of 
> pure symmetry it won't help alone.
> 
> One thing that could be added to the equation is the information from 
> the files sequence (filenames and / or timestamps).
> 
> *Setting* (or pre-setting) things, as you precognize, is easy. It is 
> also manual and tedious. What would really be nice is if the automated 
> tools would recognize and fix this kind of situation. cpclean does it if 
> there is no symmetry.
> 
> I should grab my old test case and try it.
> 
> 
> > I did notice that some other programs are able to dump multiple photos 
>  > in the program and it would sepearte the panos.
>  > Junk photos are also being seperated.
>  > Is this beyond the reach of Hugin and related programs?
> 
> It already exists. 
> 
> 
> Just not integrated in the GUI. Not sure how much a GUI makes sense for 
> this use case. I have a license of Autopano Pro (which is *the* "other 
> program"). It works, but the GUI and system overhead around it are a 
> drag. I very much prefer to run panostart on the server.
> 
> Yuv
> 
> > 
  
_
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Bug in the camera response model?

[Seb Perez-D]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 00:53, Bruno Postle  wrote:
>>
>>Can anyone reproduce? (the steps to reproduce are in the bug report).
>
> I haven't tried to reproduce, but all this stuff has been heavily
> refactored in the layout branch, maybe it is already fixed there.

OK, checking out & compiling.

Bye,

Seb

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Flipping Photos Review

[Yuval Levy]

Dale Beams wrote:
> Has anyone else whose had flipping photo problems noticed this as well?

in the days before I started using Hugin I had two or three cases of 
architectural panos with a lot of symmetry that fooled PTgui. I provided 
one to Joost as a test case.


> This would be yet another reason to be able to set a sequence order, etc. etc.

I think with the new layout it will be possible. Also the recently 
introduced statistical cleaning of CP might help, although in cases of 
pure symmetry it won't help alone.

One thing that could be added to the equation is the information from 
the files sequence (filenames and / or timestamps).

*Setting* (or pre-setting) things, as you precognize, is easy. It is 
also manual and tedious. What would really be nice is if the automated 
tools would recognize and fix this kind of situation. cpclean does it if 
there is no symmetry.

I should grab my old test case and try it.


> I did notice that some other programs are able to dump multiple photos 
 > in the program and it would sepearte the panos.
 > Junk photos are also being seperated.
 > Is this beyond the reach of Hugin and related programs?

It already exists. 


Just not integrated in the GUI. Not sure how much a GUI makes sense for 
this use case. I have a license of Autopano Pro (which is *the* "other 
program"). It works, but the GUI and system overhead around it are a 
drag. I very much prefer to run panostart on the server.

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: Flipping Photos Review

[Tduell]

Hullo Dale,

On Oct 13, 2:30 pm, Dale Beams  wrote:
> I've just had a user explain to me that they had the same issues on photos 
> flipping.  
[snip]
 > Has anyone else whose had flipping photo problems noticed this as
well?  This would be yet another reason to be able to set a sequence
order, etc. etc.

I reckon I have seen this behaviour, but I doubt that I could quickly
find that set of photos, which I would need to do to be able to nail
down which version of hugin I was using at the time.
I will see what I can find.

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] Flipping Photos Review

[Dale Beams]

I've just had a user explain to me that they had the same issues on photos 
flipping.  After careful review, they found in a sequence of photos, hugin was 
creating control points on no related images.  For example, in a consecutive 
series of 8 photos begining from left to right you might find photos 2 and 5 
with control points on them.  This was confusing the stitcher.  Has anyone else 
whose had flipping photo problems noticed this as well?  This would be yet 
another reason to be able to set a sequence order, etc. etc.

I did notice that some other programs are able to dump multiple photos in the 
program and it would sepearte the panos.  Junk photos are also being seperated. 
 Is this beyond the reach of Hugin and related programs?

Dale




  
_
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: traditional preview

[AKS-Gmail-IMAP]

In my humble opinion there is nothing wrong with the original left to  
right tab concept of Load, Align, Exposure and Create. It should stay.  
What I see (and do) in the two Previews is "Compose". For me,  
"Compose" is the missing tab and in it should be access to all the  
processes required to visualize and compose the final image, including  
cropping the individual images in remapped context if such is  
possible, which I know is possible, just tell the programmers its not  
possible and they will do it.

Allan

On Oct 12, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Bruno Postle wrote:

>
> On Mon 12-Oct-2009 at 18:18 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>> Bruno Postle wrote:
>>
>>> Still not convinced.  The tabbed widget has been abused by
>>> Hugin/PTGui to indicate workflow, it really is best when it is used
>>> to indicated different 'aspects' or 'views' of the same object.
>>
>> agree. and we have strictly *nothing* that indicate workflow. to add
>> complexity, our workflow is not that linear (as in: you could skip on
>> some tabs; come back to other tabs later in a different order, etc).
>
> For anyone who wants to know, the tabbed workflow dates back to
> before the first 'autopano' control point generator appeared.
>
> Historically the design of Hugin was based on the idea was that you
> loaded photos in the Images tab, entered your lens settings in the
> Camera and Lens tab, manually added control points in the Control
> Points tab, Optimised then Stitched in the Stitcher tab.
>
> i.e. you moved from left to right as you went, I even think the tabs
> were numbered 1, 2, 3 etc...
>
> With a control point generator and the Assistant, the workflow
> becomes 'Load, Align, Create', and the tabs are only used to fix
> things if this goes wrong - In whatever order makes sense.
>
> If the Preview becomes the main interface, this 'Load, Align,
> Create' workflow needs to move to the Preview.
>
> -- 
> 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: possible memory leak in enblend & enfuse?

[grow]

Roger,
(I will now display my naivety about the development process.)

This seemed like you have got to the underlying bug.
Do we need to do something else to get this fix into the next Hugin
release?  Does it need to be formally entered in the bug tracker ... I
vaguely remember Harry - I think it was - logging a bug when this
first came up  ... or will someone appropriate have noticed and just
incorporated it?

all the best

George

On 11 Oct, 12:10, Rogier Wolff  wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 05:14:08PM -0700, grow wrote:
> > output file.  The crashes tend to happen as the number of mask and/or
> > the complexity of their shape increases,  especially if I request a
> > full-size output file.
>
> It seems you have so many (157) seams that some of them are quite
> short (only two entries). Apparently two entries is not a problem,
> except for the situation where they are the wrong way around: The
> first should not be moveable(*). So having corrected the code for
> making sure that the first one is (non)movable, enblend runs just
> fine.
>
> The patch for enblend is attached.
>
> George's village hotel now stitches just fine at 12000x6000.
>
>         Roger.
>
> (*) Or the other way around, I don't care. Too many negatives makes my
> head spin.
>
> --
> ** r.e.wo...@bitwizard.nl **http://www.BitWizard.nl/** +31-15-2600998 **
> **    Delftechpark 26 2628 XH  Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233    **
> *-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
> Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement.
> Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific!
> Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. - Adapted from lxrbot FAQ
>
>  infinite-fix.diff
> 1KViewDownload
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Bug in the camera response model?

[Bruno Postle]

On Tue 13-Oct-2009 at 00:42 +0200, Seb Perez-D wrote:
>
>I just got bitten by a strange bug, which I described here:
>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2877384&group_id=77506&atid=550441
>
>Basically, with two lenses and different camera response models, the
>output depends on which image is first, which was a surprise to me.
>
>Can anyone reproduce? (the steps to reproduce are in the bug report).

I haven't tried to reproduce, but all this stuff has been heavily 
refactored in the layout branch, maybe it is already fixed there.

-- 
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: traditional preview

[Bruno Postle]

On Mon 12-Oct-2009 at 18:18 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>Bruno Postle wrote:
>
>> Still not convinced.  The tabbed widget has been abused by
>> Hugin/PTGui to indicate workflow, it really is best when it is used
>> to indicated different 'aspects' or 'views' of the same object.
>
>agree. and we have strictly *nothing* that indicate workflow. to add
>complexity, our workflow is not that linear (as in: you could skip on
>some tabs; come back to other tabs later in a different order, etc).

For anyone who wants to know, the tabbed workflow dates back to 
before the first 'autopano' control point generator appeared.

Historically the design of Hugin was based on the idea was that you 
loaded photos in the Images tab, entered your lens settings in the 
Camera and Lens tab, manually added control points in the Control 
Points tab, Optimised then Stitched in the Stitcher tab.

i.e. you moved from left to right as you went, I even think the tabs 
were numbered 1, 2, 3 etc...

With a control point generator and the Assistant, the workflow 
becomes 'Load, Align, Create', and the tabs are only used to fix 
things if this goes wrong - In whatever order makes sense.

If the Preview becomes the main interface, this 'Load, Align, 
Create' workflow needs to move to the Preview.

-- 
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] Bug in the camera response model?

[Seb Perez-D]

Hi all

I just got bitten by a strange bug, which I described here:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2877384&group_id=77506&atid=550441

Basically, with two lenses and different camera response models, the
output depends on which image is first, which was a surprise to me.

Can anyone reproduce? (the steps to reproduce are in the bug report).

Best,

Seb

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Rogier Wolff]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:09:50AM +0200, Rogier Wolff wrote:
> I'm going to kill it and lose the control points I added. I'm not
> happy. :-(

I added those control points again. Ran the optimize again, this time
from the optimizer tab and checking the "v" box before optimizing.  It
came up with the "v is very small are you sure?" again. I clicked no,
saved my project, optimized again and clicked yes this time. The
problem reproduces cleanly: It's stuck again.

I'll try to upload a test-set after some sleep. 

Roger. 

-- 
** r.e.wo...@bitwizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
**Delftechpark 26 2628 XH  Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233**
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement. 
Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific! 
Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. - Adapted from lxrbot FAQ

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: traditional preview

[Yuval Levy]

Hi Bruno,

as I said, this mockup is dead. That said...


Bruno Postle wrote:
> I'm not excited by this idea that the Preview window will require a 
> permanent floating toolbox.  It will take up screen space wherever 
> you put it, so this functionality should just be properly integrated 
> into the Preview window itelf.

from my point of view whether floating or embedded: it uses up the same 
surface of the screen, so the "take up screen space" argument does not hold.

There are many meanings to "properly integrated".

To me it means: implement the function so that it takes up the least 
amount of space necessary.


> Transient pop-up windows for specialist functionality like keyboard 
> entry is a good thing.

I don't see keyboard entry as specialist functionality. to me it is 
central part of my workflow and the way I work with Hugin.


>> disagree. this is where the complexity of the Stitcher tab starts:
>> mixing workflow with panorama settings. The Stitcher tab shall be
>> workflow only. And eventually will become a tab in the palette as well.
> 
> Sounds like you are recreating the existing GUI, but with the 
> Preview attached to the bottom of the main frame.

yes, my bad. as I said, consider that mockup dead. The hierarchical 
positioning of the palette vs. preview was wrong. my bad.


> Still not convinced.  The tabbed widget has been abused by 
> Hugin/PTGui to indicate workflow, it really is best when it is used 
> to indicated different 'aspects' or 'views' of the same object.

agree. and we have strictly *nothing* that indicate workflow. to add 
complexity, our workflow is not that linear (as in: you could skip on 
some tabs; come back to other tabs later in a different order, etc).

I currently don't see any efficient way to represent the workflow. First 
of all, *the* workflow does not exist. There are many different 
variations - too many to hard-code them in any sort of linear 
representation. The workflow is dynamic. I think the workflow should not 
be at the top of the hierarchy of the interface (as it currently is, 
with the tabs). And I made the mistake of putting the fast preview at 
the top of the hierarchy. I am now convinced that there is no single 
aspect that deserves that spot, and we should enable the user to view 
the different aspects / dimensions, one or two at the time.


> This would develop into something like this: the whole Preview is a 
> tabbed interface, with the tabs named 'Compose', 'Crop', 'Layout', 
> 'Slow' for the different 'modes' that we already have.
> 
> The Compose tab would be 'drag mode', but there would be visible 
> buttons for Straighten, Centre and Fit, text entry boxes for numeric 
> transform, FoV, sliders for HFoV and VFoV and all the projection 
> stuff we already have.
> 
> The Crop tab would be 'crop mode', there would be an Autocrop button 
> and text entry boxes for panorama pixel size and crop window.  This 
> could later gain vector-mask editing functionality.
> 
> I'm not 100% convinced by this either, it's a lot like the 'ribbon' 
> thing.

I think it is going into the right direction. Need some more time to think.

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: traditional preview

[Yuval Levy]

Hi Thomas,

T. Modes wrote:
> I don't like the tabbed palette.

OK, I understood. Consider my mockup dead. It's back to the drawing 
board. I gained some interesting insights from these discussions.

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: hugin mentioned in an article

[Yuval Levy]

Hallo Thomas, and welcome.

I am following your work and I like your panoramas.

thomas bredenfeld wrote:
> yuval, you're right about the different versions of hugin. but that's
> too complicated for the readers ;-)
> 
> sometimes imprecision is the price to pay for airplay ;-(

I know, and I am all for *simplyfing* things in exchange for airplay. 
But I am allergic to unfair distortions and untrue statements.

A statement such as "the latest Hugin is available for Linux before it 
becomes available for Windows and OSX" is untrue and unfair.

Acceptable imprecision: "available" = "binary available".

Unacceptable untrue, unfair claim: Hugin is "available" for Linux before 
it is "available" for Windows and OSX.

This is very bad for our reputation. The vast majority of potential 
users are on Windows and OSX. The statement give them the *wrong* 
impression that we care less about them than we do care about Linux users.

I actually don't care about *any* users. I scratch 
my own itches and if my byproducts ("Abfallprodukte") are useful for 
others, good for them.

To rectify the statement in your article (while keeping it simple):
* Hugin is equally available for all platforms.
* The best and most up to date binary distributions of Hugin are on OSX.

The long story:
* Hugin is distributed as a source package that builds on all platform. 
Once we release the source code it is no longer under our control. What 
others do with it it is their business. In that sense, Hugin is equally 
*not* "available" on all platforms (user's definition of "available"), 
and the Hugin team takes a lot of care to ensure that the source code 
released builds on many platforms.
* Harry's binary distributions are of the best quality and the most up 
to date known to me (there may be others I'm not aware of - as stated 
above we have no control once the source code is released). He does a 
terrific job, and others in the OSX users community are very supportive 
(e.g. when he temporarily had no access to a Mac).

I understand that the long story is not for airplay, but the short one 
is. And to be very honest with you, I find the short one in your article 
offending, because:
(a) it implies that we favor Linux over Windows over OSX - we don't.
(b) it is oblivious of the quality of Harry's work (especially 
considering how quirky it is to get things running properly on OSX)

Simplifying is an important part of the journalistic work, but not all. 
Proper research of sources comes first. I have little respect for 
"journalistic work" that is done without proper research.

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: Hugin-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Rogier Wolff]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 03:15:34AM -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
> 
> Panorama stitching and more. A powerful software package for creation 
> and processing of panoramic images.
> 
> hugin-2009.4.0_rc1 (release candidate 1) tarball is available here:

OK. I downloaded from SVN. rev 4623 it told me. 

I'm working on my first HDR pano. I wasn't happy with the results so
before complaining I upgraded to 2009.4.0_rc1. 

(Among other things I think I saw it just calling enblend on the whole
set of 45 images, instead of hdr-merging (enfuse) each stack and then
blending (enblend) those images. )

Anyway, I loaded my project in 4.0_rc1, and stitched it. Now I clearly
see it doing enfuse on the stacks, and then blending the resulting images. 

I still have the dark/light bands, leaving the impression it is using
an under-exposed image in one stack and then teh normal image from the
next stack...

Anyway, I still have some ghosting because everything is not correctly
alighned, so I added a bunch of control points. "realingment needed" so
I click optimize!

Next it warns me that a very small V value has been found, do I accept
the results? I click yes, and it's been consuming CPU time since then.
100% for ten minutes. No gui responses nothing. 

I'm going to kill it and lose the control points I added. I'm not
happy. :-(

Rogier. 

-- 
** r.e.wo...@bitwizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
**Delftechpark 26 2628 XH  Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233**
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement. 
Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific! 
Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. - Adapted from lxrbot FAQ

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: traditional preview

[Bruno Postle]

On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:22 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>Bruno Postle wrote:
>> I don't think there is enough functionality here to justify a tabbed
>> palette, how much space would all this stuff take up in one frame?
>
>not yet. when the fast preview will become the hub, the tabbed palette
>will contain many more functions.

I'm not excited by this idea that the Preview window will require a 
permanent floating toolbox.  It will take up screen space wherever 
you put it, so this functionality should just be properly integrated 
into the Preview window itelf.

Transient pop-up windows for specialist functionality like keyboard 
entry is a good thing.

>disagree. this is where the complexity of the Stitcher tab starts:
>mixing workflow with panorama settings. The Stitcher tab shall be
>workflow only. And eventually will become a tab in the palette as well.

Sounds like you are recreating the existing GUI, but with the 
Preview attached to the bottom of the main frame.

>if the palette is docked. If not it is floating. Consider the tabbed
>palette as *the* control - with the exception of those actions that are
>taken on the images or on the preview themselves (identifying CP
>manually; cropping; masking; dragging; etc.)

Still not convinced.  The tabbed widget has been abused by 
Hugin/PTGui to indicate workflow, it really is best when it is used 
to indicated different 'aspects' or 'views' of the same object.

This would develop into something like this: the whole Preview is a 
tabbed interface, with the tabs named 'Compose', 'Crop', 'Layout', 
'Slow' for the different 'modes' that we already have.

The Compose tab would be 'drag mode', but there would be visible 
buttons for Straighten, Centre and Fit, text entry boxes for numeric 
transform, FoV, sliders for HFoV and VFoV and all the projection 
stuff we already have.

The Crop tab would be 'crop mode', there would be an Autocrop button 
and text entry boxes for panorama pixel size and crop window.  This 
could later gain vector-mask editing functionality.

I'm not 100% convinced by this either, it's a lot like the 'ribbon' 
thing.

-- 
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: traditional preview

[Bruno Postle]

On Mon 12-Oct-2009 at 07:41 -0700, T. Modes wrote:
>
>Other idea: We could add a menu bar. In this case we could remove 
>the captions of the buttons and use a button size like the main 
>window. So we would save a lot of space.

The main window button-bar used to have captions, but they got lost 
along the way.  I suspect that most people don't know what these 
buttons do and never use them.

>Also the Select all and Select none buttons could go the the images 
>buttons panel below, maybe at the first position. And so we could 
>win more space.

Yes, the select all/none buttons definitely belong together with the 
image button strip.

BTW Thanks for implementing the F11 full screen mode, this makes a 
big difference on the 800x480 eepc screen.

-- 
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: hugin mentioned in an article

[thomas bredenfeld]

hi carl, bruno, yuval and harry!

as i'm not member of this list up to now, thanks to carl to point me
by pm to this discussion about my article in futurezone.orf.at.

@carl
you're right. in the article there are some point which aren't as
precise as they should be. i'm sorry about that. some explanation
should be helpful:

first, these article is dedicated to a mainstream, non-specialist
audience as futurezone is in general. my intention is to point poeple
to interesting stuff besides the usual mac-windows-linux or canon-
nikon-sony battles ;-) so nobody will realize such not so precise
things like happened with the lines about hugin.

second, the articles are limited to a certain number of characters. so
things tend to be rough and an author has no chance to elaborate
things more in depth.

third, sometimes te articles get edited by the online editors staff.
here they tried to add some up-to-date information and they inserted
the hint to "hugin 2.0". that's not written by me. i don't read all
articles after they went online. so i didn'd realize this.

@bruno and yuval as hugin developers
i'm sorry about this imprecisions concerning the hugin project. but i
think it's not a drama. much more important is to spread the word.
usual futurezone articles where something is mentioned "for free" are
very popular and i m very affiliated to panotools, the lists and
panorama making in general. and also i'm a real fan of open source
projects. so jimmy wales (wikipedia) and joi ito (creative commons)
are part of the circle of friends. so this was a thankful subject.

i try to use my position as a writer and teacher to spread the word
for hugin. you'll find it mentioned in my recent photoshop book and
especially in my upcoming book about digital panoramic photography,
where i featured hugin in a detailed step-by-step workshop. so you
both and all hugin guys are invited to enjoy some additional airplay
for hugin ;-) i would be happy to cause some access peaks for you on
the hugin website ;-)

besides that i'm teaching my students how to use hugin in my
educational work in "interactive imaging".

yuval, you're right about the different versions of hugin. but that's
too complicated for the readers ;-)

sometimes imprecision is the price to pay for airplay ;-(

@ harry
as carl wrote, he isn't thinking unrespectful of me. we know each
other.
btw: featuring imagefuser in the photoshop book was fine. thanks again
for your support. in the upcoming panorama book the hdr/fusing chapter
unfortunately has to be very short, but on the book companion website
(http://panoramabuch.com) there will be some significant additional
stuff about hdr and fusing on the site. it will be lauchend beginning
of november.

keep on the good work!
kind regards
thomas

On 12 Okt., 16:01, Yuval Levy  wrote:
> Bruno Postle wrote:
> > On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:33 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
> >> Second, if we look at what is officially in these distributions by
> >> default, some of them have not even bothered upgrading from 0.7.0 *beta*
>
> > This is the real advantage of switching to a date-based versioning
> > scheme, if Ubuntu was shipping with 'hugin 2007' then there would be
> > pressure for the distro to upgrade.
>
> > (I'm not saying Fedora is any better, F11 has 0.7.0 and F12 will
> > likely still have 0.8.0)
>
> Just to make things clear to the general public (not to you who know how
> Open Source works): we are not complaining about Fedora, Ubuntu and the
> likes, we are just trying to correct the misperception that "Linux" is
> better supported. It is not. Journalists take notes.
>
> 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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[Yuval Levy]

Thank you, Bart, for going through this well done analysis.

Bart van Andel wrote:
> - Open Hugin 2009.2.4450 (by Ad), on my Windows Vista SP3 setup.
> - Clicked "Align..." on the assistant tab, which started APSCpp 2.5.2.

It can't be APSCpp 2.5.2 - APSCpp 2.5.2 has not been released yet.

If a binary says it is 2.5.2... caveat emptor.

The current status of APSCpp:

* 2.5.2 does not exist. The trunk, that will eventually become 2.5.2, is 
broken, work in progress, with no estimated time to fix. Nobody is 
actively working on it *now*. Nobody should distribute binaries made 
from APSCpp's trunk, as requested by Bruno a few weeks ago.

* 2.5.0 is the official "stable" release, but it has memory leaks and is 
likley to crash on large projects / low memory.

* Bruno issued recently a tarball of APSCpp 2.5.1 (RC2 right now) which 
is 2.5.0 + fixes. The RCs are also tagged in SVN. RC2 is the recommended 
one to build and distribute, and is likely to become the official stable 
release before the end of the month.


> NB: upon trying with an older version of APSCpp (the one supplied with
> SVN 4075), the "Align" button in the assistant tab yields a perfect
> result (including correct exposures) right away.

I don't recall what version of APSCpp is delivered with Ad's SVN 4075 
snapshot (note that SVN 4075 is not enough to characterize a version of 
Hugin - it could be trunk/4075; or 2009.2/4075; or 0.7.0/4075).

 From what you describe it seems that it is 2.5.0.

Bottom line of all of this: CAVEAT EMPTOR. Verify binaries before using 
them and before trusting them to do what you expect them to do.

Thanks Bart for going through the pains of doing it.

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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[Bart van Andel]

Just saved both files and ran the following steps:

- Open Hugin 2009.2.4450 (by Ad), on my Windows Vista SP3 setup.
- Clicked "Align..." on the assistant tab, which started APSCpp 2.5.2.
As you can see in the output which I pasted below, something is going
wrong: APSCpp is reporting FOV of 180 degrees. It should be closer to
75 degrees, if the 24mm reported focal length is correct. This is a
(known) bug with the current 2.5.2 build.
- Trying the "Create control points" button using Panomatic instead
(Images tab), the images got aligned well enough. Not perfect, but
well enough.
- Opened the GL preview. The image borders are clearly visible, partly
from the imperfect overlap, but also in the blue part of the sky.
- Opened the traditional preview. Image borders less well pronounced.
- Ran Exposure optimization with the default setting (low dynamic
range). The traditional preview looks better now, while the GL preview
still shows the same borders (pressing the Photometrics button shows
the optimized results, which are quite good).
- Stitching results in a seamless stitch.

NB: upon trying with an older version of APSCpp (the one supplied with
SVN 4075), the "Align" button in the assistant tab yields a perfect
result (including correct exposures) right away.

--
Bart

APSCpp output below
-
APSCpp, enhanced autopano-sift-c version 2.5.2 23July2009

  Default fisheye lens type is equal-area.
  Focal length will be computed from hfov.
  Stereographic projection enabled for hfov >= 65.0 degrees.
Filename C:\temp\panotemp\_MG_.JPG
  rectilinear  width 5616  height 3744  hfov 180
  reduce to 1600 x 1066 (Scale 3.5100)...
  convert to stereographic projection ...
  find keypoints ...
  32 keypoints found

Filename C:\temp\panotemp\_MG_8889.JPG
  rectilinear  width 5616  height 3744  hfov 180
  reduce to 1600 x 1066 (Scale 3.5100)...
  convert to stereographic projection ...
  find keypoints ...
  15 keypoints found
-

On 12 okt, 12:20, don  wrote:
> here are the 
> originalshttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_.JPGhttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889.JPG
> (both files are 7 MB big)
>
[snip]
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: traditional preview

[T. Modes]

Hi Yuv,

I don't like the tabbed palette. This a nothing other than a
**ribbon**. So you could use a wxRibbon in wx3.0. But I don't like
this control, it hides to much controls and you have to continously
changing the tab.
E. g. if you want to change output size and crop. First you go to
image size and input the image size. Now you have to switch to the
crop tab. You start entering values. But now you don't see whats the
width. Also go you back to image size tab. And so on...

And when you want to add more functions to this tab you will end with
many tabs, because every tab has a limited size. And the tabs are
wider than the window width. And now you are in a circle.

Other idea: We could add a menu bar. In this case we could remove the
captions of the buttons and use a button size like the main window. So
we would save a lot of space. Also the Select all and Select none
buttons could go the the images buttons panel below, maybe at the
first position. And so we could win more space.

Thomas
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Yuval Levy]

Bruno Postle wrote:
> The HTML (wiki) manual is important, the man pages are irrelevant

agree.


> Yes, the wiki Hugin_* pages that don't reference 2009.2.0 features 
> need to be updated.  Basically, the Stitcher and Images tabs have 
> changed a bit, the Preferences have changed a lot

Wiki editing is not difficult for the average user. No particular extra 
tools required. We need to make potential volunteers aware. I put a 
quick and dirty note on our homepage.

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: Hugin-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Yuval Levy]

Bruno Postle wrote:
> On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:35 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>> Bruno Postle wrote:
>>> My desktop is Gnome (Centos4), but Hugin launches the manual in
>>> Konqueror.
>> is this intended? i.e. is Konqueror your default web browser?
> 
> Nope, I didn't even realise it was installed on the system until 
> Hugin launched it for me.
> 

File a bug report at 

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: hugin mentioned in an article

[Yuval Levy]

Bruno Postle wrote:
> On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:33 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>> Second, if we look at what is officially in these distributions by
>> default, some of them have not even bothered upgrading from 0.7.0 *beta*
> 
> This is the real advantage of switching to a date-based versioning 
> scheme, if Ubuntu was shipping with 'hugin 2007' then there would be 
> pressure for the distro to upgrade.
> 
> (I'm not saying Fedora is any better, F11 has 0.7.0 and F12 will 
> likely still have 0.8.0)

Just to make things clear to the general public (not to you who know how 
Open Source works): we are not complaining about Fedora, Ubuntu and the 
likes, we are just trying to correct the misperception that "Linux" is 
better supported. It is not. Journalists take notes.

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: hugin mentioned in an article

[Bruno Postle]

On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:33 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>
>Second, if we look at what is officially in these distributions by
>default, some of them have not even bothered upgrading from 0.7.0 *beta*

This is the real advantage of switching to a date-based versioning 
scheme, if Ubuntu was shipping with 'hugin 2007' then there would be 
pressure for the distro to upgrade.

(I'm not saying Fedora is any better, F11 has 0.7.0 and F12 will 
likely still have 0.8.0)

-- 
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: Hugin-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Bruno Postle]

On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:35 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>Bruno Postle wrote:
>> My desktop is Gnome (Centos4), but Hugin launches the manual in
>> Konqueror.
>
>is this intended? i.e. is Konqueror your default web browser?

Nope, I didn't even realise it was installed on the system until 
Hugin launched it for me.

-- 
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: Hugin-2009.4.0_rc1 source code released

[Bruno Postle]

On Sun 11-Oct-2009 at 21:41 -0400, Yuval Levy wrote:
>
>> Also since I've written most of the 'manual' pages, I'd like to see
>> some commitment from others to improve it before we do the work to
>> change the infrastructure.
>
>You mean the current HTML manual? or do you mean plain text man pages?

The HTML (wiki) manual is important, the man pages are irrelevant to 
the vast majority of users.  We need to have man pages, and if 
somebody wants to improve them then that is great, but so long as 
there is no disinformation in them they can stay as they are.

>> Note that the shipped 2009.2.0 manual was out-of-date, as will the
>> 2009.4.0 manual.  Getting the manual up-to-date is much less work
>> than migrating it.
>
>you mean getting up to date the wiki pages?

Yes, the wiki Hugin_* pages that don't reference 2009.2.0 features 
need to be updated.  Basically, the Stitcher and Images tabs have 
changed a bit, the Preferences have changed a lot

-- 
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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[RizThon]

I tried with the original and I get the same good results as with the lower
resolution images...

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 18:21, don  wrote:

>
> oh and they are originally in AdobeRGB, dunno if that may be causing
> some problems?
>
> On 12 říj, 12:20, don  wrote:
> > here are the originalshttp://
> don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_.JPGhttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889.JPG
> > (both files are 7 MB big)
> >
> > On 12 říj, 11:52, RizThon  wrote:
> >
> > > Can you post the original pictures? I'll just check if I get the same
> > > results as you...
> >
> > > Also previously I said that I could clearly distinguish the 2 pictures
> in
> > > the fast preview, but it's not as pronounced as on your
> screenshothttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/huginpreview.jpgwhereit really
> looks like
> > > the exposure of the 2nd picture was modified.
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 17:05, don  wrote:
> >
> > > > I don't understand this. I downloaded the same version as you have
> and
> > > > tried to use the resized photos I linked here - it stitched it
> without
> > > > problems. So I then took the original files (5616x3744) and did the
> > > > same process - and now the stitch looks bad again.
> >
> > > > On 12 říj, 10:17, RizThon  wrote:
> > > > > By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the
> intersection of
> > > > the
> > > > > 2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good
> but in
> > > > > the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on
> the
> > > > grass)
> > > > > and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is
> just
> > > > > perfect.
> >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:
> > > > > > I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
> >
> > > > > > I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses
> "Normal
> > > > > > (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically
> added
> > > > the
> > > > > > control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default
> /
> > > > automatic
> > > > > > values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> > > > > > checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
> >
> > > > > > Here's the pto project:
> >
> > > > > > # hugin project file
> > > > > > #hugin_ptoversion 2
> > > > > > p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> > > > > > m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
> >
> > > > > > # image lines
> > > > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> > > > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> > > > > > Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> > > > > > Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> > > > > > Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012
> b-0.0242854440807008
> > > > > > c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512
> r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
> > > > > > v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> > > > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> > > > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0
> Re=0
> > > > Va=0
> > > > > > Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0
> p1.94688357427167
> > > > > > r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> > > > > > n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
> >
> > > > > > # specify variables that should be optimized
> > > > > > v p1 r1 y1
> > > > > > v
> >
> > > > > > # control points
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> > > > > > c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
> >
> > > > > > #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> > > > > > #hugin_blender enblend
> > > > > > #hugin_remapper nona
> > > > > > #hugin_enblendOptions
> > > > > > #hugin_enfuseOptions

[hugin-ptx] Re: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[don]

oh and they are originally in AdobeRGB, dunno if that may be causing
some problems?

On 12 říj, 12:20, don  wrote:
> here are the 
> originalshttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_.JPGhttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889.JPG
> (both files are 7 MB big)
>
> On 12 říj, 11:52, RizThon  wrote:
>
> > Can you post the original pictures? I'll just check if I get the same
> > results as you...
>
> > Also previously I said that I could clearly distinguish the 2 pictures in
> > the fast preview, but it's not as pronounced as on your 
> > screenshothttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/huginpreview.jpgwhereit really 
> > looks like
> > the exposure of the 2nd picture was modified.
>
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 17:05, don  wrote:
>
> > > I don't understand this. I downloaded the same version as you have and
> > > tried to use the resized photos I linked here - it stitched it without
> > > problems. So I then took the original files (5616x3744) and did the
> > > same process - and now the stitch looks bad again.
>
> > > On 12 říj, 10:17, RizThon  wrote:
> > > > By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the intersection of
> > > the
> > > > 2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good but 
> > > > in
> > > > the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on the
> > > grass)
> > > > and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is just
> > > > perfect.
>
> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:
> > > > > I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
>
> > > > > I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses 
> > > > > "Normal
> > > > > (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically 
> > > > > added
> > > the
> > > > > control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default /
> > > automatic
> > > > > values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> > > > > checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
>
> > > > > Here's the pto project:
>
> > > > > # hugin project file
> > > > > #hugin_ptoversion 2
> > > > > p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> > > > > m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
>
> > > > > # image lines
> > > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> > > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> > > > > Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> > > > > Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> > > > > Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
> > > > > c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 
> > > > > t0
> > > > > v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> > > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> > > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0
> > > Va=0
> > > > > Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
> > > > > r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> > > > > n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
>
> > > > > # specify variables that should be optimized
> > > > > v p1 r1 y1
> > > > > v
>
> > > > > # control points
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> > > > > c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
>
> > > > > #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> > > > > #hugin_blender enblend
> > > > > #hugin_remapper nona
> > > > > #hugin_enblendOptions
> > > > > #hugin_enfuseOptions
> > > > > #hugin_hdrmergeOptions
> > > > > #hugin_outputLDRBlended true
> > > > > #hugin_outputLDRLayers false
> > > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
> > > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
> > > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
> > > > > #hugin_outputHDRBlended false
> > > > > #hugin_o

[hugin-ptx] Re: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[don]

here are the originals
http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_.JPG
http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889.JPG
(both files are 7 MB big)

On 12 říj, 11:52, RizThon  wrote:
> Can you post the original pictures? I'll just check if I get the same
> results as you...
>
> Also previously I said that I could clearly distinguish the 2 pictures in
> the fast preview, but it's not as pronounced as on your 
> screenshothttp://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/huginpreview.jpgwhere it really 
> looks like
> the exposure of the 2nd picture was modified.
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 17:05, don  wrote:
>
> > I don't understand this. I downloaded the same version as you have and
> > tried to use the resized photos I linked here - it stitched it without
> > problems. So I then took the original files (5616x3744) and did the
> > same process - and now the stitch looks bad again.
>
> > On 12 říj, 10:17, RizThon  wrote:
> > > By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the intersection of
> > the
> > > 2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good but in
> > > the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on the
> > grass)
> > > and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is just
> > > perfect.
>
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:
> > > > I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
>
> > > > I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses "Normal
> > > > (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically added
> > the
> > > > control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default /
> > automatic
> > > > values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> > > > checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
>
> > > > Here's the pto project:
>
> > > > # hugin project file
> > > > #hugin_ptoversion 2
> > > > p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> > > > m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
>
> > > > # image lines
> > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> > > > Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> > > > Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> > > > Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
> > > > c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
> > > > v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> > > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> > > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0
> > Va=0
> > > > Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
> > > > r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> > > > n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
>
> > > > # specify variables that should be optimized
> > > > v p1 r1 y1
> > > > v
>
> > > > # control points
> > > > c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> > > > c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
>
> > > > #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> > > > #hugin_blender enblend
> > > > #hugin_remapper nona
> > > > #hugin_enblendOptions
> > > > #hugin_enfuseOptions
> > > > #hugin_hdrmergeOptions
> > > > #hugin_outputLDRBlended true
> > > > #hugin_outputLDRLayers false
> > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
> > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
> > > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
> > > > #hugin_outputHDRBlended false
> > > > #hugin_outputHDRLayers false
> > > > #hugin_outputHDRStacks false
> > > > #hugin_outputLayersCompression PACKBITS
> > > > #hugin_outputImageType jpg
> > > > #hugin_outputImageTypeCompression NONE
> > > > #hugin_outputJPEGQuality 80
> > > > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDR exr
> > > > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDRCompression
>
> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 200

[hugin-ptx] Re: Language Translation Patch, second attempt

[T. Modes]

Hi Yuv,

> attached is my second attempt at patching the source tree so that also
> strings outside of wxWidgets can be translated.
>
> This one should work on Windows (or at least not break anything) within
> the SDK. Please test on OSX too.
>

it compiles on Windows, but the string does not get translated. (Yes,
I added the string to the .po-file).

Thomas
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[RizThon]

Can you post the original pictures? I'll just check if I get the same
results as you...

Also previously I said that I could clearly distinguish the 2 pictures in
the fast preview, but it's not as pronounced as on your screenshot
http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/huginpreview.jpg where it really looks like
the exposure of the 2nd picture was modified.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 17:05, don  wrote:

>
> I don't understand this. I downloaded the same version as you have and
> tried to use the resized photos I linked here - it stitched it without
> problems. So I then took the original files (5616x3744) and did the
> same process - and now the stitch looks bad again.
>
> On 12 říj, 10:17, RizThon  wrote:
> > By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the intersection of
> the
> > 2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good but in
> > the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on the
> grass)
> > and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is just
> > perfect.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:
> > > I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
> >
> > > I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses "Normal
> > > (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically added
> the
> > > control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default /
> automatic
> > > values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> > > checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
> >
> > > Here's the pto project:
> >
> > > # hugin project file
> > > #hugin_ptoversion 2
> > > p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> > > m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
> >
> > > # image lines
> > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> > > Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> > > Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> > > Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
> > > c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
> > > v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> > > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> > > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0
> Va=0
> > > Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
> > > r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> > > n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
> >
> > > # specify variables that should be optimized
> > > v p1 r1 y1
> > > v
> >
> > > # control points
> > > c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> > > c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
> >
> > > #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> > > #hugin_blender enblend
> > > #hugin_remapper nona
> > > #hugin_enblendOptions
> > > #hugin_enfuseOptions
> > > #hugin_hdrmergeOptions
> > > #hugin_outputLDRBlended true
> > > #hugin_outputLDRLayers false
> > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
> > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
> > > #hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
> > > #hugin_outputHDRBlended false
> > > #hugin_outputHDRLayers false
> > > #hugin_outputHDRStacks false
> > > #hugin_outputLayersCompression PACKBITS
> > > #hugin_outputImageType jpg
> > > #hugin_outputImageTypeCompression NONE
> > > #hugin_outputJPEGQuality 80
> > > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDR exr
> > > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDRCompression
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 15:09, don  wrote:
> >
> > >> So as I said, I'm using WinXP SP3. I tried downloading (probably) the
> > >> latest version (0.8.0.3943 Ad Huikeshoven), which was said to work on
> > >> Vista. I chose default installation, run Hugin.exe, loaded images,
> > >> pressed Align, it started looking for control points but in the end it
> > >> didn'

[hugin-ptx] Re: GSoC2009_layout with XYZ for Windows - please test

[Oskar Sander]

That's a known bug (see previously in the thread).  A workaround is to build
your project in Ad's version first, then copy the new binaries.

2009/10/12 Zoran Zorkic 

> Crashes for me while adding photos (Nikon D90 jpegs) on Xp 32bit and
> Vista 64bit.
> I just copied your files over the last Ad build 4450.
>
-- 
/O

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[don]

I don't understand this. I downloaded the same version as you have and
tried to use the resized photos I linked here - it stitched it without
problems. So I then took the original files (5616x3744) and did the
same process - and now the stitch looks bad again.

On 12 říj, 10:17, RizThon  wrote:
> By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the intersection of the
> 2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good but in
> the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on the grass)
> and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is just
> perfect.
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:
> > I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
>
> > I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses "Normal
> > (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically added the
> > control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default / automatic
> > values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> > checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
>
> > Here's the pto project:
>
> > # hugin project file
> > #hugin_ptoversion 2
> > p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> > m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
>
> > # image lines
> > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> > Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> > Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> > Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
> > c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
> > v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> > #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> > i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0 Va=0
> > Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
> > r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> > n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
>
> > # specify variables that should be optimized
> > v p1 r1 y1
> > v
>
> > # control points
> > c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> > c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> > c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> > c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
>
> > #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> > #hugin_blender enblend
> > #hugin_remapper nona
> > #hugin_enblendOptions
> > #hugin_enfuseOptions
> > #hugin_hdrmergeOptions
> > #hugin_outputLDRBlended true
> > #hugin_outputLDRLayers false
> > #hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
> > #hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
> > #hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
> > #hugin_outputHDRBlended false
> > #hugin_outputHDRLayers false
> > #hugin_outputHDRStacks false
> > #hugin_outputLayersCompression PACKBITS
> > #hugin_outputImageType jpg
> > #hugin_outputImageTypeCompression NONE
> > #hugin_outputJPEGQuality 80
> > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDR exr
> > #hugin_outputImageTypeHDRCompression
>
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 15:09, don  wrote:
>
> >> So as I said, I'm using WinXP SP3. I tried downloading (probably) the
> >> latest version (0.8.0.3943 Ad Huikeshoven), which was said to work on
> >> Vista. I chose default installation, run Hugin.exe, loaded images,
> >> pressed Align, it started looking for control points but in the end it
> >> didn't find any (previous versions did).I addded the control points
> >> manually and then did some exposure optimalization - the end result
> >> was nearly OK, but still I think that PS CS4 produced it slighly
> >> better. But because I'm too lazy to add control points manually, I
> >> went back to the last fully working version (0.8.0.3943 Ad
> >> Huikeshoven), did the same (except adding control points manully - the
> >> assistant took care of this), then did the optimalization (low dynamic
> >> range)...and the end result was bad again. I believe I must be doing
> >> something very wrong, becau

[hugin-ptx] Re: GSoC2009_layout with XYZ for Windows - please test

[Zoran Zorkic]

On Sep 29, 6:13 pm, Yuval Levy  wrote:
> I hope the (larger than expected) effort was worth it and it will result
> in usage/bug reports.

Crashes for me while adding photos (Nikon D90 jpegs) on Xp 32bit and
Vista 64bit.
I just copied your files over the last Ad build 4450.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[RizThon]

By the way in the Fast Preview i can also easily see the intersection of the
2 pictures because they don't match perfectly (the horizon is good but in
the sky a cloud isn't stitched correctly and same a lot closer on the grass)
and there's some visible vignetting. But the blended panorama is just
perfect.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 16:12, RizThon  wrote:

> I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".
>
> I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses "Normal
> (rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically added the
> control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default / automatic
> values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
> checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...
>
> Here's the pto project:
>
> # hugin project file
> #hugin_ptoversion 2
> p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
> m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314
>
> # image lines
> #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
> i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
> Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
> Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
> Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
> c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
> v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
> #-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
> i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0 Va=0
> Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
> r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
> n"_MG_8889small.jpg"
>
>
> # specify variables that should be optimized
> v p1 r1 y1
> v
>
> # control points
> c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
> c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
> c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
> c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
> c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
> c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
> c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
> c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
> c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
> c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
> c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
> c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
> c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
> c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
> c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
> c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
> c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0
>
> #hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
> #hugin_blender enblend
> #hugin_remapper nona
> #hugin_enblendOptions
> #hugin_enfuseOptions
> #hugin_hdrmergeOptions
> #hugin_outputLDRBlended true
> #hugin_outputLDRLayers false
> #hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
> #hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
> #hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
> #hugin_outputHDRBlended false
> #hugin_outputHDRLayers false
> #hugin_outputHDRStacks false
> #hugin_outputLayersCompression PACKBITS
> #hugin_outputImageType jpg
> #hugin_outputImageTypeCompression NONE
> #hugin_outputJPEGQuality 80
> #hugin_outputImageTypeHDR exr
> #hugin_outputImageTypeHDRCompression
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 15:09, don  wrote:
>
>>
>> So as I said, I'm using WinXP SP3. I tried downloading (probably) the
>> latest version (0.8.0.3943 Ad Huikeshoven), which was said to work on
>> Vista. I chose default installation, run Hugin.exe, loaded images,
>> pressed Align, it started looking for control points but in the end it
>> didn't find any (previous versions did).I addded the control points
>> manually and then did some exposure optimalization - the end result
>> was nearly OK, but still I think that PS CS4 produced it slighly
>> better. But because I'm too lazy to add control points manually, I
>> went back to the last fully working version (0.8.0.3943 Ad
>> Huikeshoven), did the same (except adding control points manully - the
>> assistant took care of this), then did the optimalization (low dynamic
>> range)...and the end result was bad again. I believe I must be doing
>> something very wrong, because this seems like incredibly easy task and
>> I'd swear that few years back it would have worked for me in Hugin
>> without any problems.
>>
>> Daniel, my panorama preview looks nothing like yours - I can clearly
>> see the stitches in mine. It is not that bad in Fast Preview Panorama
>> as it is in Preview Panorama (what is the difference?) though.
>>
>> If any of you would like to try and have a go with the photos, I've
>> uploaded them here:
>> http://don.vn

[hugin-ptx] Re: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[RizThon]

I'm using "Version 2009.1.0.4240 Ad Huikeshoven".

I just dropped your 2 images in hugin (it automatically chooses "Normal
(rectilinear)", 24mm and 3.43 for the lens info), I automatically added the
control points and clicked the "Stitch now!" button (all default / automatic
values: Rectilinear, FOV 36x20, size 1494x811, "Blended panorama"
checked)and I get a nice blended panorama...

Here's the pto project:

# hugin project file
#hugin_ptoversion 2
p f0 w1494 h811 v36  E14.2408 R0 n"TIFF_m c:NONE r:CROP"
m g1 i0 f0 m2 p0.00784314

# image lines
#-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522
i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.2407913106641 Er1 Ra-0.487184405326843
Rb-0.656815350055695 Rc0.530101180076599 Rd-0.175079703330994
Re0.266844481229782 Va1 Vb-0.562101693275359 Vc0.697986748519527
Vd-0.465450043300806 Vx0 Vy0 a0.00981937612810012 b-0.0242854440807008
c0.115908411251388 d0 e0 g0 p1.86975840070512 r7.45839605972155e-017 t0
v24.6992627798865 y-6  Vm5 u10 n"_MG_small.jpg"
#-hugin  cropFactor=3.42522218289397
i w1600 h1067 f0 Eb1 Eev14.1310773935208 Er1 Ra=0 Rb=0 Rc=0 Rd=0 Re=0 Va=0
Vb=0 Vc=0 Vd=0 Vx=0 Vy=0 a=0 b=0 c=0 d=0 e=0 g=0 p1.94688357427167
r-4.58960554821018e-014 t=0 v=0 y5.3315254049968  Vm5 u10
n"_MG_8889small.jpg"


# specify variables that should be optimized
v p1 r1 y1
v

# control points
c n0 N1 x1079.11301 y596.213184 X373.027032 Y602.18922 t0
c n0 N1 x1220.530422 y599.102304 X515.502063 Y602.735974 t0
c n0 N1 x1162.478479 y611.132028 X458.413643 Y615.554016 t0
c n0 N1 x1151.312451 y610.784152 X447.697109 Y615.451378 t0
c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
c n0 N1 x1156.34132 y624.963225 X452.109932 Y629.637137 t0
c n0 N1 x1293.826983 y536.78735 X583.969347 Y542.337458 t0
c n0 N1 x1452.982383 y578.174896 X718.702932 Y579.499934 t0
c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
c n0 N1 x1184.090007 y599.721106 X480.139624 Y603.590377 t0
c n0 N1 x1508.872868 y617.994293 X762.222422 Y613.007973 t0
c n0 N1 x1493.373942 y613.081415 X749.654938 Y609.450382 t0
c n0 N1 x1255.329885 y586.293772 X548.894429 Y591.38195 t0
c n0 N1 x922.505554 y584.044079 X197.687794 Y591.935524 t0
c n0 N1 x1000.783409 y539.74238 X288.310223 Y543.714683 t0
c n0 N1 x946.718196 y584.221199 X224.062558 Y592.061588 t0
c n0 N1 x1097.636405 y556.367918 X393.459208 Y561.809487 t0
c n0 N1 x1481.369191 y624.845392 X738.565614 Y620.145061 t0
c n0 N1 x1554.910862 y629.042134 X795.170011 Y622.561956 t0

#hugin_optimizeReferenceImage 0
#hugin_blender enblend
#hugin_remapper nona
#hugin_enblendOptions
#hugin_enfuseOptions
#hugin_hdrmergeOptions
#hugin_outputLDRBlended true
#hugin_outputLDRLayers false
#hugin_outputLDRExposureRemapped false
#hugin_outputLDRExposureLayers false
#hugin_outputLDRExposureBlended false
#hugin_outputHDRBlended false
#hugin_outputHDRLayers false
#hugin_outputHDRStacks false
#hugin_outputLayersCompression PACKBITS
#hugin_outputImageType jpg
#hugin_outputImageTypeCompression NONE
#hugin_outputJPEGQuality 80
#hugin_outputImageTypeHDR exr
#hugin_outputImageTypeHDRCompression


On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 15:09, don  wrote:

>
> So as I said, I'm using WinXP SP3. I tried downloading (probably) the
> latest version (0.8.0.3943 Ad Huikeshoven), which was said to work on
> Vista. I chose default installation, run Hugin.exe, loaded images,
> pressed Align, it started looking for control points but in the end it
> didn't find any (previous versions did).I addded the control points
> manually and then did some exposure optimalization - the end result
> was nearly OK, but still I think that PS CS4 produced it slighly
> better. But because I'm too lazy to add control points manually, I
> went back to the last fully working version (0.8.0.3943 Ad
> Huikeshoven), did the same (except adding control points manully - the
> assistant took care of this), then did the optimalization (low dynamic
> range)...and the end result was bad again. I believe I must be doing
> something very wrong, because this seems like incredibly easy task and
> I'd swear that few years back it would have worked for me in Hugin
> without any problems.
>
> Daniel, my panorama preview looks nothing like yours - I can clearly
> see the stitches in mine. It is not that bad in Fast Preview Panorama
> as it is in Preview Panorama (what is the difference?) though.
>
> If any of you would like to try and have a go with the photos, I've
> uploaded them here:
> http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_small.jpg
> http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889small.jpg
>
> thanks guys.
>
> On 10 říj, 03:56, dkloi  wrote:
> > On 9 Oct, 14:24, don  wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the advice. I tried fiddling with the settings in EXPOSURES
> > > tab, but that didn't give me any good result. The source photos are
> > > JPEGs, straight from camera, both shot at 1/160 f11 @ ISO 100. To me
> > > it seems like Hugin is doing some kind of exposure optimisation which
> > > is not really necessary, hence the stran

[hugin-ptx] Re: [PanoTools-devel] Te0 and Te1 parameters in libpano13

[Lukáš Jirkovský]

2009/10/12 Kornel Benko :
> Am Monday 12 October 2009 schrieb Jim Watters:
>>
>> Pablo d'Angelo wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I have just commited some experimental extension to the TrX, TrY, TrZ
>> > parameters for mosaicing images of a planar scene to the libpano13 SVN 
>> > trunk
>> >
>> > ciao
>> >    Pablo
>> >
>> I just attempted to build.  And I get a build error.
>> 1>.\math.c(1807) : error C2065: 'M_PI' : undeclared identifier
>> Maybe you meant PI instead, that is defined in filter.h
>>
>
> Interesting, here it is defined in "/usr/include/math.h", therefore no error.
>
> Maybe we should define it the same as in fftn.c, but better in some of our 
> header files.
>
>        Kornel
>
> --
> Kornel Benko
> kornel.be...@berlin.de
>

M_PI doesn't have to be defined (eg. C99 doesn't contain it). And in
C++ it's (I think) optional and some compilers doesn't define it.

Lukas

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: what is hugin doing to the exposure?

[don]

So as I said, I'm using WinXP SP3. I tried downloading (probably) the
latest version (0.8.0.3943 Ad Huikeshoven), which was said to work on
Vista. I chose default installation, run Hugin.exe, loaded images,
pressed Align, it started looking for control points but in the end it
didn't find any (previous versions did).I addded the control points
manually and then did some exposure optimalization - the end result
was nearly OK, but still I think that PS CS4 produced it slighly
better. But because I'm too lazy to add control points manually, I
went back to the last fully working version (0.8.0.3943 Ad
Huikeshoven), did the same (except adding control points manully - the
assistant took care of this), then did the optimalization (low dynamic
range)...and the end result was bad again. I believe I must be doing
something very wrong, because this seems like incredibly easy task and
I'd swear that few years back it would have worked for me in Hugin
without any problems.

Daniel, my panorama preview looks nothing like yours - I can clearly
see the stitches in mine. It is not that bad in Fast Preview Panorama
as it is in Preview Panorama (what is the difference?) though.

If any of you would like to try and have a go with the photos, I've
uploaded them here:
http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_small.jpg
http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/hugin/_MG_8889small.jpg

thanks guys.

On 10 říj, 03:56, dkloi  wrote:
> On 9 Oct, 14:24, don  wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the advice. I tried fiddling with the settings in EXPOSURES
> > tab, but that didn't give me any good result. The source photos are
> > JPEGs, straight from camera, both shot at 1/160 f11 @ ISO 100. To me
> > it seems like Hugin is doing some kind of exposure optimisation which
> > is not really necessary, hence the strange result. Perhaps it's worth
> > mentioning that I'm using the stitch assistent - I choose the two
> > photos from my hard drive, press ALIGN and when Hugin shows me
> > Panorama preview, it already looks strange (http://don.vn.cz/temp/repo/
> > hugin/huginpreview.jpg)
>
> What exactly did you fiddle with in the exposure tab? Try selecting
> Low Dynamic Range, or Low Dynamic Range with Variable White balance,
> and then optimise. Preview the stitch, the images should overlap
> pretty well even without blending.
>
> Example Pre-Exposure 
> Optimisationhttp://cnqo.phys.strath.ac.uk/~daniel/Photos/Examples/AlignImages.jpg
> Example Post-Exposure Optimisation, no 
> blendinghttp://cnqo.phys.strath.ac.uk/~daniel/Photos/Examples/NotBlended.jpg
>
> You camera could be doing some processing to the image prior to
> writing out the JPEG which could be the source of your problem. Make
> sure the EV numbers are the same for both images in the Camera and
> Lens tab. Hugin uses the EV numbers to calculate the relative
> brightness of the images.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---