[hugin-ptx] Enblend encountered degenerate image/mask geometry

2018-08-20 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Dear mailing list,

sorry for being a pest, but this issue is blocking more and more of my 
panoramas.

(See also "enblend oddity" thread.)

I keep running into the issue that enblend determines that my seam lines 
are defective, triggering the check in mask.h:969. What exactly is causing 
isolated points in images?

I included a minimal example again, 2 images which can be found 
here: https://airesearch.de/files/staticimgs/enblendProb/example.zip
enblending them gives the following output:

$ enblend -o result.tif --compression=DEFLATE  -f101957x17605+4588+1257 
image0.tif image1.tif 
enblend: info: loading next image: image0.tif 1/1
enblend: info: loading next image: image1.tif 1/1
enblend: encountered degenerate image/mask geometry; too high risk of 
defective seam line


Now, it could be my input images, as some other panoramas work fine. How 
can I set the black-alpha-mask-check-isolated-points-threshold parameter? 
I'd like to see the masks generated, which I obviously can't, as no output 
is created.
Or, it could be a bug somewhere. If you reverse the order of the two 
images, everything works. Doesn't that indicate a bug?

Help me, hugin mailing list, you're my only hope.

Best,
Benjamin

-- 
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/a212e820-e9f5-4a78-95c6-e1d8b9b80c1b%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Enblend oddity

2017-08-26 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hrrmmm, I'm in a committed long-term relationship with enblend, but seeing that 
it can't fulfil my needs right now, I had a quick flirt with multiblend 
works! Most of the images have good overlap and no parallax/moving objects 
anyway, so hardly any blending was necessary.

Interesting. Was just about to write that re-ordering didn't work, but wasn't 
sure if I tried all combinations. Yes, in a certain order, it blends without 
problems. Maybe that's worth filing a bug report for...?

(Also, I should add a feature request for multiblend: support deflate 
compression ...)

Thanks! You saved my pano. :)

Best,
Benjamin

Monkey wrote:

Are you wedded to enblend? multiblend would have no such issues, and actually 
does blend, not just assemble, disconnected images.

Alternatively, have you tried reordering the images? Rename testing0002.tif to 
testing.tif and vice versa.


--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/1aac2933-c16c-dd8b-7b08-bd66c8cbe3d3%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [hugin-ptx] Banding artifacts

2014-09-18 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Hi Terry,
I had the same problems with the default-enblend from the Ubuntu repos. I
built it myself to get a multithreaded/GPU accelerated version - but the
problems persisted. (Plus the image cache version produced the good old
horizontal black lines again.)

I uploaded a testcase to
http://airesearch.de/files/static/testcase_hugin.zip - low quality jpeg
files, shows the same artifacts as in the previous message with my setup.
My wild guess would be that the photometric optimization doesn't work (as
desired) for my images...

2014-09-18 2:27 GMT+02:00 Terry Duell tdu...@iinet.net.au:

 Hello Benjamin,


 On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:23:38 +1000, Benjamin Schnieders 
 benjamin.schnied...@gmail.com wrote:

  Dear Hugin community,

 after a two year absence, I returned to shooting panoramas. However,
 things have changed. I can't get Hugin/enblend to merge my pictures
 seamlessly. I attached two images, one being prior photometric optimization
 - sure, my lens has a bit vignetting, so vertical banding artifacts are to
 be expected. Then, after photometric optimization (tried it in different
 ways), at best a result like in the second image is achieved. I remember
 that Hugin / enblend used to deal with such minor brightness
 deviations easily - I also tried several enblend options (including the
 much discussed --no-ciecam) but with not much changes.

 Hugin version 2013.0.0.4692917e7a55 from official Ubuntu repos, enblend
 enblend 4.2-e4d6ae9dfe83 selfbuilt.

 Any ideas what I'm doing wrong and what I could try? All my current
 panoramas seem to suffer from photometric optimization difficulties...


 Same difficulties with all panos stitched with Hugin version
 2013.0.0.4692917e7a55 and enblend 4.2-e4d6ae9dfe83, or have you had the
 same problem with other versions/builds of enblend?

 Is is possible to make a set of images and the .pto file available for one
 of your smaller projects so we can see if the problem can be reproduced? On
 Dropbox or similar.

 Cheers,
 --
 Regards,
 Terry Duell

 --
 A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
 http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
 ---You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
 Groups hugin and other free panoramic software group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
 msgid/hugin-ptx/op.xmcwwbj8rs0ygh%40localhost.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
hugin and other free panoramic software group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/CAFfh8fSaRU2nGuFinEdgWZqZDvabEhZOw5EHLAFJy_F6O2qgQQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [hugin-ptx] Banding artifacts

2014-09-18 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Oh. Thanks Thomas. I don't know how I could miss that.

Yes, apparently ufraw performs a lens correction now and introduces black 
borders to each image by default. Thanks for your time, and good light :)

Benjamin


T. Modes wrote:
 Hi Benjamin,


 The problem with your testsets are the black borders in your input images. I 
 assume you have correct the lens distortion with another program, but the 
 corrected images does not contain an alpha channel, which marks the pixels 
 without information. So the images contains black borders which results in 
 the effects you observed.
 There are 3 possible ways to fix this:
 1.) Add a crop to all images to crop the black borders in Hugin (on the masks 
 tab)
 2.) Check the settings of your program for lens correction. Export the images 
 to a format with supports alpha channels (or transparency). JPG does not 
 support alpha channels.
 3.) Input the uncorrected images to Hugin. Hugin can also do the lens 
 correction in the same run as remapping the images for the pano. This will 
 yield to a better result, because the pixels needs only one time to 
 interpolated (instead of twice as in your current workflow: one time for lens 
 correction and one times for pano remapping).


 Thomas

-- 
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
hugin and other free panoramic software group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/541B596A.4070800%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: hugin/panotools/align_image_stack for astronomical images

2012-08-27 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Hi John,

 It sounds like the first image is extremely different from the last
 image, so I'm thinking align_image_stack will not really work (Bruno
 or others can say for sure.) Are you trying to make an image of a
 particular star or group of stars? In either case, using all 1000
 images, the area of interest (in common to all images) is presumably a
 small portion of any one image and this area of interest needs to
 appear in all 1000 images. I assume you might want to partially *add*
 the images rather than just average them? Or do you just want to
 enfuse them to remove noise and enhance saturation? Did you take any
 dark slides? (I'm probably a bit out of my depth on these last questions.)
Yes, the whole idea is to reduce the sensor noise. We'll see if enfuse
does a better job than a simple average... However, the overlap region
of all images will be quite small, I'd like to keep the whole area,
simply with enhanced SNR in the overlapping regions.

I have taken a few darkframes, probably not enough for a decent result
(it was a pretty quick action, and it was late at night)

 A way around the limitation (my assumption) of align_image_stack might
 be to break the images into sequential groups of say 25 or 50 (0-49,
 50-99, etc) and use align_image_stack on each group (the program
 should be able to handle the much smaller stacking differences in each
 group.) Then you can process each group separately. Finally you can
 take the sharper clearer processed stacks and process them together. I
 think this would be just as fast (or faster) and just as easily
 automated You might need to do some manual cropping and/or process use
 cpfind rather than align_image_stack on the second set.

 Another possibility is to make interleaved stacks (0-49, 24-74, 50-99,
 etc.
Yep, already thought of that. Using the complete imageset for testing
simply takes too much time, so I tested everything with the first 50
frames. Unfortunately, even those 50 images are heavily blurred when
averaged after aligning.


 Maybe the best thing would be to look at similar OSS that is
 specifically designed for this. It's probably already solved all these
 problems and has been optimized for the task. I don't remember the
 name of the software, but I know it exists. I'm sure Google will be
 helpful ;-)
Yep, there's immix, for example, that was already proposed in the
mailing list here. Then again, technically the panotools should be
capable of exactly what I need :)
 And what does this have to do with pinhole photography ?   ;-)
Must have been the email I was reading when answering to the group :) I
don't see those 2 linked anyhow, what's the effect?

Best  regards,
Benjamin


-- 
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] hugin/panotools/align_image_stack for astronomical images

2012-08-26 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Hi all,

I need your help aligning some images :) I have a sequence of 1000 night
sky images taken with just a tripod, so alignment is needed before
averaging them.

The align_image_stack workflow does not seem to work properly for me -
the resulting images are aligned, but not very accurately, so that
averaging them results in a blurry mess.
Checking what went wrong, it seemed that align_image_stack did not find
2 control points for each consecutive pair of images, but keeps on
stacking photos. When adding proper points, the result is better, but
far from acceptable.

Another issue was the seemingly added-up error - I manually placed
control points between the first and last image, which seemed to lower
the blur by about 50%.

Now, manual work is acceptable for smaller image sets, but I wished to
fully automate the process for the full 1000 picture series. Thus, a
couple of questions:


- What would be appropriate settings for align_image_stack to detect
more/better control points? I already use -s 0.
- Can I tell align_image_stack to search for control points between all
combinations of images? I know this will take a while
- What settings would be needed that align_image_stack can detect
control points that move about half of the image's width?

Concerning the latter two points, I might rather use cpfind -
unfortunately, I have not yet figured out a way to let cpfind find any
control points on stars.

- What would be appropriate settings for cpfind to detect control points
on pictures of stars? I already tried to use --fullscale.

- Can I easily use either cpfind or align_image_stack from a script to
create control points in a pyramid-like manner (meaning, between
0-1-2-3-4..., 0-2-4-6..., 0-4-8-12..., 0-8-16-24,.) (to minimize
added up error and to keep CP count comparatively low)

- Can I force align_image_stack or cpfind to connect each image to the
rest with at least 3-4 good control points, or die?


So far for now, happy to hear any recommendations :)
Thank you,
Benjamin

-- 
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] Introducing Pannellum - an HTML5 Panorama Viewer

2012-05-29 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Hi Matthew,

great work! :) Linux, Ubuntu 64 and SeaMonkey (some kind of Firefox) 
2.9.1 - no problems.

I wonder, however - how large may the panoramas become, before it gets
laggy (or browsers crash)? For example, I don't know a browser
displaying a half-a-gigapixel image directly, so that'd be at least one
limitation...

Benjamin

Matthew Petroff wrote:
 After a year of on and off development, Pannellum, a free and open
 source panorama viewer for the web, is ready for release. Built using
 HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and WebGL, it is plug-in free. The
 lightweight viewer, just 18kB gzipped, can be deployed using a single
 file and displays full equirectangular panoramas. One can easily embed
 panoramas in web pages as an iframe, using code generated by the
 included configuration utility.

 For more information and an example, see:
 http://www.mpetroff.net/archives/2012/05/28/introducing-pannellum/

 Or the project page:
 https://bitbucket.org/mpetroff/pannellum/

 I've tested it across a range of browsers, but I'd appreciate any
 feedback or bug reports.

 -Matthew

-- 
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] nona-gpu and stereographic input projection

2012-03-18 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Bruno Postle wrote:
Yes, nona-gpu implements the projection code independently of 
libpano13 and hasn't kept up with things like stereographic input.


Good to know. For unknown output projections, nona-gpu issues a warning 
that the projection type is not supported, and falls back to plain nona. 
Shouldn't it behave the same ways for unknown input projections then?


Benjamin

--
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] Panorama of a threedimensional object

2011-09-30 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

gms76 wrote:

Hello,

I tried to make a panorama of some photos, which were taken inside a
tube. To make the photos, the camera moved lateral. The problem is,
that due to spatial distortion lines which are painted on the wall of
the tube have a pincushion distortion and hugin cannot connect them.
The reason for this extreme pincushion distortion is, that the wall of
the tube is concave and I change the position of the camera in the
longitudinal direction of the pipe.

Is it possible to make a panorama of this pipe?

Thank you for your help,
Georg


Hi Georg,

I assume you want to take a panorama of the inside of a subway tube, or 
similar?


You are right, the three-dimensionality of the motive renders hugin 
unable to correct the distortion here. Hugin has no idea of the 
underlying three dimensional objects, and, in mosaic mode, will try to 
fit the images on a plane.


The only way I know to improve your image is by taking an huge amount of 
pictures, then only using a few center pixels from each image. The more 
detail in the third dimension, the more images you will need...


Benjamin


--
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] How to prevent nona from opening windows with -g for GPU?

2011-09-18 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
Another possibility might be to run it as a different user - but I'm not 
sure if the graphical context is created then.


Maybe one can share the context from one program to nona - starting a 
graphical context server, which just opens the window once and allows 
nona to access it. GPU-enhanced enblend also opens another window, but 
that is way less annoying, as it is just created once.


Or build in a batch-mode for nona - but that'd violate the one tool 
does exactly one thing rule under linux...


Benjamin

Jan Martin wrote:

Just tried

MetaCity window-matching utility
http://burtonini.com/blog/computers/devilspie/

with
gdevilspie
http://code.google.com/p/gdevilspie/

graphical editor.

Unfortunately while it moves the nona windows to another workspace, it 
only does so AFTER they pop up.

Still a lot of annoying flickering. Just faster.

Jan


--
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] How to prevent nona from opening windows with -g for GPU?

2011-09-17 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Jan Martin wrote:

Hi all,

when using nona -g for GPU support, nona opens an empty window per 
source image.


Is there any way to stop this?
It just flickers, and the focus changes to those windows and the PC 
becomes unusable.


Thanks,
Jan
--
http://www.DIY-streetview.org


Hi Jan,

which OS are you using? On Ubuntu (should be the same for all Linux 
distributions using Gnome with Compiz), I added window rules in 
CompizConfig like No focus = title=^nona$ - makes the nona window 
unfocusable. Add some more and the window won't annoy you any more. Of 
course, this wont help for any other OS...


Benjamin

--
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


Re: [hugin-ptx] Use of hugin for a sports shot combining 5 shots from a snowboarder jumping

2011-02-02 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
How exactly are include area masks applied? From short tests, I assume
that this region is simply masked/not used from all other pictures. (Which
would then lead to empty/black spots on 2 overlapping include area masks)
This is also a bad idea for exposure stacks, which I had some trouble with.
Can someone put more light on this issue?

Thx,
Benjamin

-- 
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] segfault in enblend/vigra

2010-12-26 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hi all,

recently I discovered a segfault in enblend. It is a fairly big project, 
so i can not *simply* provide input images or the whole core dump, but 
here's a stacktrace:


#0  0x004dc928 in void vigra::read_bandsvigra::Diff2D, 
vigra::MultiImageVectorMaskAccessor4vigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  , unsigned 
char(vigra::Decoder*, vigra::Diff2D, 
vigra::MultiImageVectorMaskAccessor4vigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  , unsigned char) ()
#1  0x00522de8 in void vigra::importVectorImagevigra::Diff2D, 
vigra::MultiImageVectorMaskAccessor4vigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char   
(vigra::ImageImportInfo const, vigra::Diff2D, 
vigra::MultiImageVectorMaskAccessor4vigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  ) ()
#2  0x00523663 in void 
vigra::importImageAlphavigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  
(vigra::ImageImportInfo const, 
std::pairvigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 
1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u  , 
std::pairvigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra_ext::WriteFunctorAccessorvigra::Thresholdunsigned char, unsigned 
char, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  ) ()
#3  0x00523815 in void 
enblend::importvigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 
0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u , 
vigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned char**, 
vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char (vigra::ImageImportInfo 
const, std::pairvigra::BasicImageIteratorvigra::RGBValueunsigned 
char, 0u, 1u, 2u, vigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u**, 
vigra::RGBAccessorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u   
const, std::pairvigra::BasicImageIteratorunsigned char, unsigned 
char**, vigra::StandardValueAccessorunsigned char  const) ()
#4  0x0055da47 in 
std::pairvigra::BasicImagevigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u, 
std::allocatorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u  *, 
vigra::BasicImageunsigned char, std::allocatorunsigned char * 
enblend::assemblevigra::BasicImagevigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 
1u, 2u, std::allocatorvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u  , 
vigra::BasicImageunsigned char, std::allocatorunsigned char  
(std::listvigra::ImageImportInfo*, 
std::allocatorvigra::ImageImportInfo* , vigra::Rect2D, 
vigra::Rect2D) ()
#5  0x005c1119 in void 
enblend::enblendMainvigra::RGBValueunsigned char, 0u, 1u, 2u 
(std::liststd::string, std::allocatorstd::string  const, 
std::listvigra::ImageImportInfo*, 
std::allocatorvigra::ImageImportInfo*  const, 
vigra::ImageExportInfo, vigra::Rect2D) ()

#6  0x00476396 in main ()



enblend version is

$ enblend --version
enblend 4.1-cd12da20db1a

Recent version of the Ubuntu PPA.

Solved the issue for myself by splitting the project up to 4 smaller 
images, then manually blending those in gimp. Is it just a memory issue? 
But then I'd prefer a bad_alloc over a segfault :)


Can I provide further information to solve the bug?

Thx,
Benjamin

--
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 

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Announce: Enblend/Enfuse version 4.0 - Final Release

2009-12-19 Thread Benjamin Schnieders
on SeaMonkey 1.1.x, the whole top menu is shifted about a page width to 
the right - the background image is loaded, but not shown.

(see http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/3000/screenshotbc.png )

 [0] http://enblend.sourceforge.net

-- 
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: Enblend/Enfuse 4.0 dev snapshots

2009-09-08 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hi Chris,

 First of all CPU load is a silly
 measure.[...] For
 a user only wall-clock time matters.
   
sure. I did not yet take times, but the new version is definitely faster 
than the old one. Of course 3 busy-waiting cpus and only one doing 
something useful will stress a 4-core cpu the same as 4 useful threads - 
the same in 'top', different wall clock time.

 Second, read about Amdahl's law
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law
 It matters.
   
I know Amdahl's law, (good old parallel programming lectures) but I 
thought enblends work was somewhat simpler to split up than it seems.
 The current implementation does _not_ scale
 well beyond two processors.  The reasons for
 this are yet unknown.  You are welcome to run
 Enblend with your favorite profiler, identify
 the bottleneck(s), and send me a bunch of
 patches that rectify the congestion.
   
Can you propose a (free) multi-thread profiler for linux? (Looking out 
for one for some time now...) If so, I'll have a look at it, enough of 
exploiting hugin/panotools now, time to give something back ;)

 IMO, you did nothing wrong.  My results are
 similar.
Fine :) I will check later how much faster enblend has become. I'm 
missing the output which image is processed (or, is finished being 
processed) a little...

Thanks for reply :)
Benjamin



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] Enblend/Enfuse 4.0 dev snapshots

2009-09-07 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hi all,

just trying a selfcompiled v4.0 - stitching a pretty big project now.

Inspecting the enblend run with top I see that indeed enblend sometimes 
uses more than 100% cpu - but never more than like 200%, usually it is 
around 100% and from time to time there is a peak using somewhat more. 
As I have a quadcore and I see it is perfectly used up by nona I'm a 
little disappointed about enblend - was this a malconfiguration?

enblend verbose version info tells me:
enblend 4.0-b93c2aed500d

Extra feature: dmalloc support: no
Extra feature: image cache: no
Extra feature: GPU acceleration: yes
Extra feature: OpenMP: yes - version 2005-5
   - support for nested parallelism
   - support for dynamic adjustment of the 
number of threads
   - using 4 processors and up to 3 threads


Is this the up-to date version or id I compile something wrong?

Thanks :)
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] nona-gpu and multicore?

2009-08-02 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hi all,

just read that nona-gpu was integrated in the trunk, and already a 
question about it:

Will the gpu-feature work with multiple threads? Or, what is the 
tradeoff between using multiple threads (in my case, 4) of nona vs. 
nona-gpu?

Just thinking, it'd be stupid if nona-gpu is like 100% faster, but 3 
threads are waiting for the fourth to complete... Or, in this case, can 
the gpu-feature be enabled for one thread only?

Questions, questions, ... ;)
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: blending artifacts, weird output crash

2009-07-14 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Bruno Postle wrote:
 The previous reports for this bug suggest that it happens when the 
 width of the output is greater than 32768 pixels.  It would be 
 useful to prove or disprove this.
   
ACK, unfortunately no - none of the 2 versions had the same errors as 
the large one.

 Some interesting tests would be to:

 Try again with the output at 47543x100.
   
100 was too small, I chose 1000 instead - perfect stitch, no problems.
 Try with the width at 32000 then at 33000.
   
Done. Unfortunately, both don't have the old stitching errors, but 
instead an interesting new one...
http://astrobenja.de/staticimgs/32and33.png (that wouldn't be a problem, 
Gimp can fix it, but still...)

 Roll the panorama 90° using the numeric transform in the preview and 
 stitch a 8381x47543 panorama instead.
   
Yet to be done. I assume, not in cylindrical projection? ;)
 make: *** [yotest.tif] Killed
 make: *** Datei »yotest.tif« wird gelöscht
 
 Seems that something external stopped the process, maybe an oom 
 killer?
   
AFAIK I don't have such a thing, 16gb ram + 10gb swap should be enough 
anyway... And if the hard disk is full usually enblend stops with can 
not write to file, and leaves a HD with 0 byte free memory ;)

 http://astrobenja.de/staticimgs/pos.png .
 
 This looks ok?
   
Certainly looks different from the rest, as all the others are cropped 
around the actual image region, only this one and few others are not... 
That looked strange to me.


More tests I can do? I'll try another with enblends default settings 
(without -l 29 and --fine-mask) but I'm not even entirely sure that 
enblend is the problem...

Thanks so far,
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: blending artifacts, weird output crash

2009-07-14 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Bart van Andel wrote:
 http://astrobenja.de/staticimgs/pos.png.
 
 This looks ok?
   
 Certainly looks different from the rest, as all the others are cropped
 around the actual image region, only this one and few others are not...
 That looked strange to me.
 

 This is perfectly valid for 360 degree panoramas. The images at the
 360 degree 'seam' will break into two parts: one part to the far left
 of the temporary image, and one part to the far right.
Thanks, good to know :)

I solved it!

First disabled both -l 29 and --fine mask, result looked good, so I 
tried another time, only removing --fine-mask.
Needless to say, the stitch is much faster without, and (!) all 
artifacts are gone.
Strange As there is this other little bug around that can only be 
fixed with enabling this option ;)


So thanks again you two,
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] where to find settings file for hugin?

2009-07-07 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

hi all,

just moved to a 64 bit machine, copied my old home folder over and 
compiled hugin, all went fine until i wanted to execute:

a...@abdesktop64:~$ hugin
Xlib:  extension GLX missing on display :0.0.
Xlib:  extension GLX missing on display :0.0.
MainFrame::RestoreLayoutOnNextResize()
ERROR: 01:58:32.880283 
(/home/ab/hugin_compile/hugin/src/hugin1/hugin/huginApp.cpp:304) 
OnInit(): Tempdir could not be created: /media/Linux/huginTemp
ERROR: 01:58:32.880382 
(/home/ab/hugin_compile/hugin/src/hugin1/hugin/huginApp.cpp:308) 
OnInit(): could not change to temp. dir: /media/Linux/huginTemp
Segmentation fault
a...@abdesktop64:~$ cd /media/
a...@abdesktop64:/media$ sudo mkdir Linux
a...@abdesktop64:/media$ cd Linux/
a...@abdesktop64:/media/Linux$ sudo mkdir huginTemp
a...@abdesktop64:/media/Linux$ hugin
Xlib:  extension GLX missing on display :0.0.
Xlib:  extension GLX missing on display :0.0.
MainFrame::RestoreLayoutOnNextResize()
Segmentation fault


... i think everything will be fine if i can just reset all settings ;) 
but where can i find that file? (almost crawled through my whole home 
folder now...)

thx :)

Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] Fusing before or after

2009-05-27 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Bruno Postle wrote:
 On Tue 26-May-2009 at 22:54 +0200, Benjamin Schnieders wrote:
   
 but everything align_image_stack can give me is a complete .hdr, (which 
 is, as far as i know, bad input to enfuse) a set of remapped images 
 (which i don't need as i want to remap them later, aligned in total) or 
 a pto file that holds information about the image offsets.

 seems that the latest is just what i need, but then, is there a method 
 of merging these pto files together in a way that the images will stick 
 together?
 

 Yes, you could use ptomerge (from Panotools::Script) to join all the 
 projects created by align_image_stack with a project created by 
 autopano-sift-c or panomatic.
   
that worked fine, thanks :) as i saw, ptomerge did not recalculate the 
positions of the relatively oriented images, (just as i guessed) but 
instead added all the control points holding the stacks, that's fine as 
well. test worked out nicely, now my 84-image-pano of a nighly power 
plant will be next (looking forward to it :))

i wrote some scripts to ease the extraction of different levels of 8-bit 
pngs from 14-bit raws, then creating ptos for each stack, i think 
panotools-script could be enhanced with scripts like these (mine are 
definitely not for other eyes, because of the code quality ;))


 This is exactly what the match-n-shift --stacks option does (also 
 from Panotools::Script).

 i.e. something like this in the hugin preferences should do what you 
 want:

AutopanoExe=match-n-shift
Args=-b -a -f %f -v %v -c -p %p -o %o %

i will also give that a try, last time i built hugin was without 
match-n-shift, so next time my cpu is idle i will try it...

thank again,
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] Fusing before or after

2009-05-26 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

hi all,
actually i'm having a problem with exactly that question right now.


i have a series of image stacks i'd like to stitch and fuse, so stack1_0 
.. stack 1_6 until stack7_6. the thing is, the images are pretty dark, 
so automatic control point generation does a very bad job using all the 
images. align_image_stack however manages to align my stacks pretty well 
(they are shot with a bad tripod, so a little alignment is needed)

but everything align_image_stack can give me is a complete .hdr, (which 
is, as far as i know, bad input to enfuse) a set of remapped images 
(which i don't need as i want to remap them later, aligned in total) or 
a pto file that holds information about the image offsets.

seems that the latest is just what i need, but then, is there a method 
of merging these pto files together in a way that the images will stick 
together?

to get proper results, atm i only see one solution:

- take the brightest set of images, generate control points, align them
- starting from the brightest image, use align_image_stack to align each 
whole stack to a .pto file
- manually add up the translations calculated by align_image_stack to 
all further images and insert them into the big .pto from the beginning
- run enfuse and enblend.

definitely not the best way. are there scripts oder other tricks that 
will help?

thanks,
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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] enfuse on n16bit vs n*2 8bit images

2009-04-02 Thread Benjamin Schnieders

Hi all,

i read about the basics of enfuse and how it works, from what is written 
on the website i expected the same result for, say, 3 16 bit images 
fused together as for 6 8 bit images. however, from my subjective point 
of view, the 6-picture approach gives better results. (how come? i 
thought using weights for all layers should be able to produce the same 
results..?)

i'm shooting raw images with a canon 450d, then batch converting them 
all with ufraw to 16bit - to extract more 8-bit-exposures i'd have to 
use at least some scripts that find out in which order my bracketed 
shots are etc, so i'd prefer to use directly the 16 bit files.

besides that, what exposures should i use for an 8-bit approach? my 
first idea was (from the series [-2, 0, +2]EV) to extract -2, -1.5 from 
the first shot, -0.5, 0, 0.5 from the middle and 1.5, 2.0 from the third 
- rather than using whole 1-EV increments, as then information from the 
middle image might struggle with the outer images ;)

thx,
Benjamin

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---