[hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic woes

[tbransco]

Hey, John.

We're both having trouble with mosaics it seems.  My post lies just below 
yours on this list.  I described a workflow in it that might be helpful to 
you.  Basically, it's likely the optimizing step that needs some changes.  
Give it a go and see how you get on with it.  If you still have problems, 
I'd be happy to try your images and help out.

Cheers,
Terry

On Saturday, August 8, 2020 at 7:17:05 AM UTC-7, John Muccigrosso wrote:
>
> I'm trying to create a mosaic image with three photos and having a heck of 
> a time.
>
> For one thing, the Fast Panorama Preview looks like the attached, which 
> doesn't seem right in terms of placement of the image in the bottom left. 
> Is it?
>
> Then I'm just not having success with the really any of the preview 
> functions or the stitching (which I realize is vague). If someone could 
> walk me through it, or give it a try with the images an tell me what 
> worked, I'd be very grateful.
>
> I'm on a Mac with Hugin 2019.2.0.b690aa0334b5.
>
> [image: Screen Shot 2020-08-08 at 16.13.50.png]
>
>

-- 
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/b54a46b9-f6e7-4b27-ab82-d331a66777bdo%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode and Lens calibration in 2013.0beta1

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2013/5/26 T. Modes 

> Hi,
>
> On 26 Mai, 11:12, Frederic Da Vitoria  wrote:
> > it took me some time to discover that "b" was barrel
>
> hover over the column header to get a longer description. There is
> also barrel mentioned. In the header itself there is not enough space
> for the longer captions.
>

Yes, that's what I found after searching around :-)



>  >  I still regret something, though: the
> > old interface allowed to check or clear the same parameter (y/p/r/X/Y/Z)
> > for all pictures at the same time. I couldn't find a way to do the same
> > thing in the new UI. Checking / unchecking columns can become cumbersome
> > when a mosaic is made of many pictures. Is there currently a way to do
> this
> > which I wasn't able to find, or could something be added?
>
> The context menu (on the optimizer tab) contains select all/select
> none - as in the old version.
>

OK, I got it. I never knew about this because the buttons were so much more
obvious :-) The names of the options aren't very intuitive, I thought that
"select" meant select the images, but I can't find a better wording. Or
maybe "Enable" and "Disable"?

Anyhow, thanks four showing the solution.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
http://www.april.org

-- 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx

--- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode and Lens calibration in 2013.0beta1

[T. Modes]

Hi,

On 26 Mai, 11:12, Frederic Da Vitoria  wrote:
> it took me some time to discover that "b" was barrel

hover over the column header to get a longer description. There is
also barrel mentioned. In the header itself there is not enough space
for the longer captions.

>  I still regret something, though: the
> old interface allowed to check or clear the same parameter (y/p/r/X/Y/Z)
> for all pictures at the same time. I couldn't find a way to do the same
> thing in the new UI. Checking / unchecking columns can become cumbersome
> when a mosaic is made of many pictures. Is there currently a way to do this
> which I wasn't able to find, or could something be added?

The context menu (on the optimizer tab) contains select all/select
none - as in the old version.

-- 
-- 
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

--- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[hugin-ptx] Re: mosaic of thermal aerial images over a flat area (with real time data on x,y,z, p,r,y)

[Agustin Lobo]

Just tried with relative TrX,TrY,TrZ and yaw. Also, I understand that units 
must be pixels.

Now results make more sense. It seems I actually have problems that could 
be related to 
sync errors between the camera and the gps and optimizing using CPs will be 
useful.
Nevertheless, using cpfind I get few CPs. Would it be useful using 
Autopano-SIFT and/or
Panomatic? What do I have to do in order to install these methods?

Also, what parameters should I optimize? I think that yaw, TrX,TrY, as TrZ 
should be pretty stable.
Any other advice will be welcome!
Thanks

Agus



On Friday, March 29, 2013 9:11:23 PM UTC+1, Agustin Lobo wrote:
>
> Hi!
> We are testing huging for the task of mosaicking aerial (~1000m) thermal 
> imagery
> over a very flat area (coastal marsh), with know gps x,y,z coordinates
> and measured attitude angles (p,r,y). For the test, we are using 7 images 
> with large
> (> 50% overlaps).
> In principle, we believe that if we have the coordinates and the attitude 
> and the area is flat, we should be able
> of getting a useful result with hugin, as accuracy requirements are very 
> low. On the negative side, it will be often hard
> getting control points as many of the images will be over the water. Are 
> we too optimistic?
>
> I've uploaded the pto file to
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3180464/testyawrel.pto
>
> where yaw is relative to the AC image and all the rest are absolute.
> Unfortunately, we do not get a successful alignment. Some questions:
>
> 1. Should x,y,z be kept as absolute (x,y are UTM) coordinates or should 
> they also be relative
> to the values of the AC image?
> 2. We are using rectilinear projection, is this correct?
> 3. We have tried optimizing x,y,z,r (as advised in a previous message). Is 
> this correct?
> 4. If we use cpfind, we get 44 tie points that look ok, but, after 
> optimization, we still get an error
> at aligning.
> 5. When we look at the Fast Panorama View, we see nothing. why?
>
> Maybe we are just attempting to do something that just cannot be done with 
> hugin, but I rather think we
> are doing something very wrong.
>
> Any help appreciated (I can upload the test images to dropbox upon 
> request).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Agus
>
>

-- 
-- 
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

--- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic Aerial Images

[Julien Schroder]

I had to do the same and I ended up doing each line seperately, there is a 
multiline option as well in hugin that might work for you if your overlap 
is good enough.

Le lundi 28 janvier 2013 08:50:09 UTC-9, mqui...@utah.gov a écrit :
>
> I have 38 aerial images of a site.  I am trying to use Hugin to build a 
> mosaic.  Hugin produced many control points but misses some.  Do the images 
> need to be in separate flight lines?  If so how do you designate the flight 
> lines and adjoining flight lines?  When I manually enter control points 
> some images have been rotated.  The quick panorama makes no sense.
>
> mcq 
>

-- 
-- 
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

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[hugin-ptx] Re: mosaic unlink view

[Battle]

Hi Thomas.  Just getting back to this.  Worked great.  I guess its more 
intuitive, but it sure takes some getting used to the new interface when 
I've been working manually all these years.  I guess its a bit like leaving 
DOS behind and going to a gui interface.  Thanks.  Battle

On Thursday, August 30, 2012 1:16:46 PM UTC-4, T. Modes wrote:
>
> Select group by lens and display the lens parameters. Then open 
> context menu (right mouse button) where the field of view is displayed 
> and select unlink. 
>

-- 
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: mosaic unlink view

[T. Modes]

Select group by lens and display the lens parameters. Then open
context menu (right mouse button) where the field of view is displayed
and select unlink.

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Bruno Postle]

On Tue 06-Dec-2011 at 13:43 +0100, Oskar Sander wrote:


Wouldn't some kind of filtering based on geometry be possible in 
the mosaic case although it won't be as unambigous?


Like using the asumption that all images are depicting a planar 
world from different viewpoints.


This ought to work in theory, but I'd rather someone worked on 
making the mosaic mode in the optimiser more stable first.


--
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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Oskar Sander]

Ok, will play with it.

Wouldn't some kind of filtering based on geometry be possible in the mosaic
case although it won't be as unambigous?

Like using the asumption that all images are depicting a planar world from
different viewpoints.

Cheers
/O

2011/12/5 Bruno Postle 

> On 5 Dec 2011 13:29, Oskar Sander wrote:
> >
> > Allright, Is there documentation on how this logics works somwhere to
> read.
> >
> > I'm guessing by the name that it is assuming a single flat plane that
> the images is should be projected on in order for the CP to match. Right?
>
> 'hom' isn't a special mosaic mode, it just turns off all the filtering
> that makes cpfind very reliable for panoramas, this filtering will remove
> all control points in a mosaic project.
>
> So 'hom' will produce lots of 'bad' points. You will need to do manual
> editing, and may be happier creating all your points manually in the first
> place.
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
/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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Bruno Postle]

On 5 Dec 2011 13:29, Oskar Sander wrote:
>
> Allright, Is there documentation on how this logics works somwhere to
read.
>
> I'm guessing by the name that it is assuming a single flat plane that the
images is should be projected on in order for the CP to match. Right?

'hom' isn't a special mosaic mode, it just turns off all the filtering that
makes cpfind very reliable for panoramas, this filtering will remove all
control points in a mosaic project.

So 'hom' will produce lots of 'bad' points. You will need to do manual
editing, and may be happier creating all your points manually in the first
place.

-- 
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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Oskar Sander]

Allright, Is there documentation on how this logics works somwhere to read.

I'm guessing by the name that it is assuming a single flat plane that the
images is should be projected on in order for the CP to match. Right?
So if the reality is different, it is better to search for CP in groups of
images where the asumption holds.  Or did I assume to much of the logics
now?

Cheers
/O

2011/12/2 Bruno Postle 

> On Fri 02-Dec-2011 at 13:25 -0800, kfj wrote:
>
>> On 2 Dez., 21:40, Bruno Postle  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> cpfind does filtering of control points by default, but the filter it
>>> uses assumes you are building a 'normal' panorama.  If you have a
>>> mosaic this filter will delete all your control points - So you need
>>> to use the "Hugin's CPFind for mosaics" preset instead of the
>>> default.
>>>
>>
>> what preset do you mean? Something in hugin? Is this something new?
>>
>
> It was new I think, but it seems to have gone in the current 2011.5.0
> snapshots.  Basically you need to add '--ransacmode hom' to the default
> cpfind parameters to get it to match a mosaic.
>
> --
> 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+unsubscribe@**
> googlegroups.com 
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
> group/hugin-ptx 
>



-- 
/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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 2 Dez., 22:58, Bruno Postle  wrote:

> >what preset do you mean? Something in hugin? Is this something new?
>
> It was new I think, but it seems to have gone in the current
> 2011.5.0 snapshots.  Basically you need to add '--ransacmode hom' to
> the default cpfind parameters to get it to match a mosaic.

I'll risk sounding pompous - but I'm a fairly competent hugin user and
even I wasn't aware of this. Maybe the fact that cpfind will fail for
mosaics if this flag isn't set needs a bit more press?

Kay

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Bruno Postle]

On Fri 02-Dec-2011 at 13:25 -0800, kfj wrote:

On 2 Dez., 21:40, Bruno Postle  wrote:


cpfind does filtering of control points by default, but the filter it
uses assumes you are building a 'normal' panorama.  If you have a
mosaic this filter will delete all your control points - So you need
to use the "Hugin's CPFind for mosaics" preset instead of the
default.


what preset do you mean? Something in hugin? Is this something new?


It was new I think, but it seems to have gone in the current 
2011.5.0 snapshots.  Basically you need to add '--ransacmode hom' to 
the default cpfind parameters to get it to match a mosaic.


--
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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 2 Dez., 21:40, Bruno Postle  wrote:
> On Fri 02-Dec-2011 at 17:23 +0100, Oskar Sander wrote:
>
>
>
> >Is is rightly understood that you  optimize all ZYX at once together (for
> >all viewpoints) then ypr for all together?   Is that always stable?

> >I've missed the fact you should give different parameters for mosaic CP
> >find, what does that do?
>
> cpfind does filtering of control points by default, but the filter it
> uses assumes you are building a 'normal' panorama.  If you have a
> mosaic this filter will delete all your control points - So you need
> to use the "Hugin's CPFind for mosaics" preset instead of the
> default.

what preset do you mean? Something in hugin? Is this something new?

Kay

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Bruno Postle]

On Fri 02-Dec-2011 at 17:23 +0100, Oskar Sander wrote:


Is is rightly understood that you  optimize all ZYX at once together (for
all viewpoints) then ypr for all together?   Is that always stable?


This might work, but really you have to optimise rpy and XYZ 
together - Ideally you already know your lens parameters and have 
them fixed.


The mosaic optimisation isn't as robust as with a 'normal' panorama, 
so I would start with the middle photo, fix XYZ and roll, then add 
one photo at a time and optimise rpyXYZ for each.



I've missed the fact you should give different parameters for mosaic CP
find, what does that do?


cpfind does filtering of control points by default, but the filter it 
uses assumes you are building a 'normal' panorama.  If you have a 
mosaic this filter will delete all your control points - So you need 
to use the "Hugin's CPFind for mosaics" preset instead of the 
default.


--
Bruno


2011/11/16 Bruno Postle 


On Tue 15-Nov-2011 at 21:25 -0800, Syv Ritch wrote:


I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
perpendicular, for the whole street.



I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
houses on that street.


This is the way to go if the building facades don't follow the street edge
closely or there is lots of complex roof detail.  I put my notes for
stitching linear mosaics here:






--
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] Re: Mosaic

[Oskar Sander]

Thats really nice Bruno!

Is is rightly understood that you  optimize all ZYX at once together (for
all viewpoints) then ypr for all together?   Is that always stable?

I've missed the fact you should give different parameters for mosaic CP
find, what does that do?

Cheers
/O



2011/11/16 Bruno Postle 

> On Tue 15-Nov-2011 at 21:25 -0800, Syv Ritch wrote:
>
>>
>> I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
>> perpendicular, for the whole street.
>>
>
>  I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
>> 3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
>> houses on that street.
>>
>
> This is the way to go if the building facades don't follow the street edge
> closely or there is lots of complex roof detail.  I put my notes for
> stitching linear mosaics here:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/**36383814@N00/5830006193/
>
> --
> 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+unsubscribe@**
> googlegroups.com 
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
> group/hugin-ptx 
>



-- 
/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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

Seems like that's what we told him already.
Try not to hold it against us that we are enjoying a conversation on
theoretical solutions after the question is answered. :-)
Nice example though (but again, it is row houses, and Syv never really
got back to us on wether it was row houses or a more suburban
situation.)
--John

On Nov 26, 10:12 am, Tom Sharpless  wrote:
> Hey all, let's get real
>
> Syv wants to make a picture of one block of houses, not build an
> experimental slit camera or invent a new technology.
>
> He needs to take a series of overlapping photos from the other side of
> the street, each one pointing more or less straight at the house
> fronts opposite. Then use Hugin's mosaic mode to align/warp them --
> with control points only on the plane of the house fronts! -- and a
> lot of hand masking in Photoshop to blend them.  Hand masking is
> needed because the seam lines must be placed where the change of
> perspective is not noticeable; and it allows you to deal with things
> like trees, poles, etc in front of the houses.  In fact by taking
> enough pictures with both vertical and horizontal displacements, one
> can often make poles and wires disappear, but there is no way to
> automate that.
>
> I'm not saying it couldn't be done with a slit camera -- it has been
> done often with video slit scans, but the image quality is hardly
> 'architectural'.  Or a sweep camera.  But both of those approaches are
> technically harder  than the tried-and-true mosaicing method, which
> has been in regular use since the renaissance,
>
> Here is a brilliant modern example by Michael 
> Koller:http://www.seamlesscity.com/city%20_scene4.html
>
> -- Tom
>
> On Nov 22, 2:17 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > These days I usually set that camera to pan in the direction of right to
> > left, with the camera held portrait.
>
> > On 21 November 2011 21:16, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > > That's interesting. It looks like it uses the camera's orientations
> > > sensor to select the angle of the strip of image it captures. As you
> > > turn the camera the strips stay vertical to the finished panorama. Did
> > > you sweep from right to left?
> > > It would be interesting to hack the software (but don't expect me
> > > to! :-)
>
> > > On Nov 21, 1:48 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > > Try this one, and its neighbouring pictures, where I intentionally
> > > twisted
> > > > the camera around the roll axis as I swept it across an arc:
> > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6066091512/in/photostream/
>
> > > > On 21 November 2011 07:28, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > > > > That's pretty fun.
> > > > > Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
> > > > > the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
> > > > > with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
> > > > > through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
> > > > > partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
> > > > > You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
> > > > > panorama. They're pretty narrow.
>
> > > > > On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > > > > As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama
> > > feature:
> > > > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/—I held the camera
> > > > > > level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the 
> > > > > > camera
> > > > > > sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other
> > > end.
> > > > > > Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to
> > > the
> > > > > > end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> > > > > > applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
>
> > > > > > On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
>
> > > > > > > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many
> > > ways.
> > > > > > > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it
> > > would
> > > > > > > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing
> > > you to
> > > > > > > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
>
> > > > > > > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
>
> > > > > > > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway 
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > > > > > > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
>
> > > > > > > Kay
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 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 hugi

[hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Tom Sharpless]

Hey all, let's get real

Syv wants to make a picture of one block of houses, not build an
experimental slit camera or invent a new technology.

He needs to take a series of overlapping photos from the other side of
the street, each one pointing more or less straight at the house
fronts opposite. Then use Hugin's mosaic mode to align/warp them --
with control points only on the plane of the house fronts! -- and a
lot of hand masking in Photoshop to blend them.  Hand masking is
needed because the seam lines must be placed where the change of
perspective is not noticeable; and it allows you to deal with things
like trees, poles, etc in front of the houses.  In fact by taking
enough pictures with both vertical and horizontal displacements, one
can often make poles and wires disappear, but there is no way to
automate that.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done with a slit camera -- it has been
done often with video slit scans, but the image quality is hardly
'architectural'.  Or a sweep camera.  But both of those approaches are
technically harder  than the tried-and-true mosaicing method, which
has been in regular use since the renaissance,

Here is a brilliant modern example by Michael Koller:
http://www.seamlesscity.com/city%20_scene4.html

-- Tom

On Nov 22, 2:17 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> These days I usually set that camera to pan in the direction of right to
> left, with the camera held portrait.
>
> On 21 November 2011 21:16, JohnPW  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > That's interesting. It looks like it uses the camera's orientations
> > sensor to select the angle of the strip of image it captures. As you
> > turn the camera the strips stay vertical to the finished panorama. Did
> > you sweep from right to left?
> > It would be interesting to hack the software (but don't expect me
> > to! :-)
>
> > On Nov 21, 1:48 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > Try this one, and its neighbouring pictures, where I intentionally
> > twisted
> > > the camera around the roll axis as I swept it across an arc:
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6066091512/in/photostream/
>
> > > On 21 November 2011 07:28, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > > > That's pretty fun.
> > > > Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
> > > > the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
> > > > with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
> > > > through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
> > > > partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
> > > > You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
> > > > panorama. They're pretty narrow.
>
> > > > On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > > > As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama
> > feature:
> > > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/—I held the camera
> > > > > level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
> > > > > sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other
> > end.
> > > > > Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to
> > the
> > > > > end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> > > > > applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
>
> > > > > On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > > > > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
>
> > > > > > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many
> > ways.
> > > > > > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it
> > would
> > > > > > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing
> > you to
> > > > > > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
>
> > > > > > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
>
> > > > > > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> > > > > > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > > > > > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
>
> > > > > > Kay
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 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
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Ian Tindale*
>
> > > > --
> > > > 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 g

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Ian Tindale]

These days I usually set that camera to pan in the direction of right to
left, with the camera held portrait.

On 21 November 2011 21:16, JohnPW  wrote:

> That's interesting. It looks like it uses the camera's orientations
> sensor to select the angle of the strip of image it captures. As you
> turn the camera the strips stay vertical to the finished panorama. Did
> you sweep from right to left?
> It would be interesting to hack the software (but don't expect me
> to! :-)
>
> On Nov 21, 1:48 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > Try this one, and its neighbouring pictures, where I intentionally
> twisted
> > the camera around the roll axis as I swept it across an arc:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6066091512/in/photostream/
> >
> > On 21 November 2011 07:28, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > > That's pretty fun.
> > > Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
> > > the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
> > > with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
> > > through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
> > > partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
> > > You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
> > > panorama. They're pretty narrow.
> >
> > > On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > > As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama
> feature:
> > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/—I held the camera
> > > > level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
> > > > sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other
> end.
> > > > Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to
> the
> > > > end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> > > > applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
> >
> > > > On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > > > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
> >
> > > > > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many
> ways.
> > > > > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it
> would
> > > > > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing
> you to
> > > > > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
> >
> > > > > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
> >
> > > > > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> > > > > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > > > > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
> >
> > > > > Kay
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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
> >
> > > > --
> > > > *Ian Tindale*
> >
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> > *Ian Tindale*
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
*Ian Tindale*

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

That's interesting. It looks like it uses the camera's orientations
sensor to select the angle of the strip of image it captures. As you
turn the camera the strips stay vertical to the finished panorama. Did
you sweep from right to left?
It would be interesting to hack the software (but don't expect me
to! :-)

On Nov 21, 1:48 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> Try this one, and its neighbouring pictures, where I intentionally twisted
> the camera around the roll axis as I swept it across an 
> arc:http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6066091512/in/photostream/
>
> On 21 November 2011 07:28, JohnPW  wrote:

> > That's pretty fun.
> > Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
> > the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
> > with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
> > through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
> > partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
> > You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
> > panorama. They're pretty narrow.
>
> > On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > > As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama feature:
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/—I held the camera
> > > level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
> > > sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other end.
> > > Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to the
> > > end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> > > applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
>
> > > On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
>
> > > > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
> > > > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
> > > > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
> > > > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
>
> > > > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
>
> > > > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> > > > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > > > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
>
> > > > Kay
>
> > > > --
> > > > 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
>
> > > --
> > > *Ian Tindale*
>
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> *Ian Tindale*

-- 
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: Mosaic

[dex Otaku]

Would Smartblend [which can deal with parallax reasonably well] not be
useful in this application?

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Ian Tindale]

Try this one, and its neighbouring pictures, where I intentionally twisted
the camera around the roll axis as I swept it across an arc:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6066091512/in/photostream/



On 21 November 2011 07:28, JohnPW  wrote:

> That's pretty fun.
> Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
> the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
> with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
> through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
> partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
> You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
> panorama. They're pretty narrow.
>
> On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> > As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama feature:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/— I held the camera
> > level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
> > sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other end.
> > Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to the
> > end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> > applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
> >
> > On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
> >
> > > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
> > > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
> > > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
> > > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
> >
> > > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
> >
> > > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> > > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
> >
> > > Kay
> >
> > > --
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> > *Ian Tindale*
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
*Ian Tindale*

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

That's pretty fun.
Notice how it tried to resolve the parallax problems. It locked onto
the front surface of the the building pretty well, but had a hard time
with distant objects "enclosed" by the building. The objects seen
through the open door and objects reflected in the window glass appear
partial and repeated rather than being sewn together.
You can also see the width of the images it collects to make the
panorama. They're pretty narrow.

On Nov 18, 1:21 am, Ian Tindale  wrote:
> As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama 
> feature:http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/— I held the camera
> level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
> sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other end.
> Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to the
> end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
> applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).
>
> On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
>
> > > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
> > > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
> > > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
> > > readily remove moving object artifacts.
>
> > That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
>
> > And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> > eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> > purpose parallax becomes an asset.
>
> > Kay
>
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> *Ian Tindale*

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Ian Tindale]

As an experiment, I shot this by abusing the Sony Sweep Panorama feature:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/iantindale/6241529419/ — I held the camera
level and simply walked along in a straight line, pointing the camera
sideways, starting at one end of that room and ending at the other end.
Obviously I must’ve veered slightly towards it by the time I got to the
end, but it was only a quickie test to see if the technique could be
applied to shooting panomurals (as I’ve termed them).

On 18 November 2011 06:34, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> > On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
> >
> > I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
> > Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
> > also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
> > readily remove moving object artifacts.
>
> That's a point (or two, rather ;-)
>
> And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
> eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
> purpose parallax becomes an asset.
>
> Kay
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
*Ian Tindale*

-- 
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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 18 Nov., 00:13, JohnPW  wrote:
> On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.
>
> I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
> Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
> also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
> readily remove moving object artifacts.

That's a point (or two, rather ;-)

And maybe trying to do stay 1D and even 2D is too limiting anyway -
eventually, we'll embrace 3D scene reconstruction, and for that
purpose parallax becomes an asset.

Kay

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

On Nov 17, 4:13 pm, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 17 Nov., 21:14, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > What is needed is probably more like a photo finish 
> > camera:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_finish
> > Which looks to be very similar tho the line camera Kay has described
> > (pretty similar idea.)
>
> Really, it should be quite simple. A sensor from a scanner should do
> the trick, use any old wide angle lens and have the scanner's sensor
> in the focal plane - there you go it's a line camera. The problem is
> that only very few people can actually go ahead and do such a thing -
> microelectronics has given us great things to do, but it's made it
> hard to do some good old tinkering... and the ones who do the
> tinkering probably charge you at least an arm and a leg

It always surprises me, but it is amazing how when you get down to it,
tinkering is still a possibility. In 2000 I did a project for my
design masters that was an experiment in physical user interface
concepts. It was designed for the museum space as a way to bring
immersive physical engagement to the interpretation of physical
artifacts. I built a working prototype that took physical input and
controls (using BasicStamp) and fed the interaction data to a Mac
laptop via the serial line. This controlled a MacroMedia Director
project that included a QuickTimeVR object movie (or maybe I just
built the program to work like a QTVR object movie?) and a bunch of
interactive media. I'm not much of a programmer and don't really know
much about electronics, but I managed.

It turned out pretty cool and worked very well. I would have
benefitted from an engineering staff though.

> > That PanoScan is cool (much like certain film panoramic cameras of the
> > past, only digital.)
>
>  Panoscan don't even give a price on their site but ask you to contact
> them for pricing... doesn't bode well.

Indeed.

> > But I'm thinking one could do this with standard equipment we all
> > already own.
>
> This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job.

I actually think using a 2D camera might be superior in many ways.
Besides ready availability of interchangeable equipment,  it would
also be more forgiving of camera movement while also allowing you to
readily remove moving object artifacts. I suppose the panorama feature
that has recently appeared on some point and shoot cameras works on
something like this method.

> By the
> way, we had this discussion before - hang on, I'll try anf find the
> thread - here it is
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx/browse_thread/thread/d6f0e20...

As usual, all that is old is new again! ;-)
I always say life isn't a line or a circle. It's a spiral, or a
corkscrew. We do things, experiment, learn from our mistakes, and do
things again. We learn and relearn the same lessons over and over,
each time moving forward and trying to do better.
It's the journey, not the destination. :-)(Three month is a pretty
fast cycle though!)

-- John

-- 
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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 17 Nov., 21:14, JohnPW  wrote:
> What is needed is probably more like a photo finish 
> camera:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_finish
> Which looks to be very similar tho the line camera Kay has described
> (pretty similar idea.)

Really, it should be quite simple. A sensor from a scanner should do
the trick, use any old wide angle lens and have the scanner's sensor
in the focal plane - there you go it's a line camera. The problem is
that only very few people can actually go ahead and do such a thing -
microelectronics has given us great things to do, but it's made it
hard to do some good old tinkering... and the ones who do the
tinkering probably charge you at least an arm and a leg

> That PanoScan is cool (much like certain film panoramic cameras of the
> past, only digital.)

 Panoscan don't even give a price on their site but ask you to contact
them for pricing... doesn't bode well.

> But I'm thinking one could do this with standard equipment we all
> already own.

This is why we now try and coerce 2D hardware to do a 1D job. By the
way, we had this discussion before - hang on, I'll try anf find the
thread - here it is

http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx/browse_thread/thread/d6f0e200ebe79f86#

Kay

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

Focal plane shutters are really designed for a more rapid exposure.
What is needed is probably more like a photo finish camera:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_finish
Which looks to be very similar tho the line camera Kay has described
(pretty similar idea.)
That PanoScan is cool (much like certain film panoramic cameras of the
past, only digital.)
But I'm thinking one could do this with standard equipment we all
already own.

I was just thinking one could use a conventional camera that can
record 1080p movies. In the portrait mode with a wide angle lens (as
appropriate) and probably an improvised steady cam (just a balanced
mount to create some inertia and dampen vibration and movement) one
could just drive (or carefully walk) down the street taking a movie. A
camera mounted on a bike, trike or a wheelchair seems like it might be
useful. One could walk it down a chalk line.

Using scripts, one could then appropriately select from the frames
(make sure blurred frames are marked or tossed) and crop them down to
the center strip. One could retain a middle strip (5-20%) of each
image (a smaller percentage if using all frames, a larger percentage
or whole image if using only a subsample of all frames. The lens
correction would be static so PanoTools could be applied to remap each
of the selected images and stitch them into manageable sozed
rectilinear images. Viola! — a giant linear panorama.

Maybe not a viable solution for Syv since he might be on a
schedule. ;-) But with so many houses, it might be worth doing the
work up front to save time in the long run.

But my intention for Syv was that he could this capture method, if
appropriate, as an image collection device and just hand select frame
grabs — directly in front of each house, each corner of each house,
one or two images between each house, etc. Something like every 30th
or 60th frame. This would allow him to lose the tripod and save many
hours in capturing images, so long as he doesn't mid losing some
resolution and increasing post processing work.

Anyone interested in working to making this happen? It seems very
possible to me.

--John

On Nov 17, 1:00 pm, Robert Krawitz  wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:29:23 -0800 (PST), kfj wrote:
>
> > On 16 Nov., 09:25, JohnPW  wrote:
> >> Ha! Just as I expected someone with a good knowledge of the subject
> >> has responded as I wrote this.
> >> ...
> >> But I really think using a camera that can
> >> take movies might be a good way to go (see below.) The idea being, the
> >> more images you capture, the less of each one you use. Ideally you
> >> would only end up using the very center most part of each image. Being
> >> handy with scripting would help a lot here (I am definitely not!)
>
> > This is really the idea of the line camera:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_line_camera
>
> > Just a wild idea here: if I'm not mistaken, there are shutters which
> > are made of a black piece of material with a slit, and the material is
> > moved so that the slit moves over the sensor - okay, I checked myself,
> > they are called focal plain shutters:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_plane_shutter
>
> Almost all modern consumer and prosumer level cameras (and all of the
> mainstream SLR systems) use focal plane shutters.  The alternative is
> a leaf shutter, which needs to be built into the lens.  That was
> common on rangefinder cameras, and many medium format and all large
> format cameras use leaf shutters in the lens.
>
> > now if you'd use such a device in a moving camera so that the slit was
> > small, but the exposure was long (I'm not sure this can be done with
> > these shutter as they come) you might end up with an image similar to
> > what you'd get from a line camera. You might have to rotate the camera
> > at the same time, or you might use a special lens that only shows a
> > vertical strip anyway (cylindrical, I'd imagine?).
>
> You can't do that with any focal plane shutter I'm aware of.  The
> curtains of the shutter move at a fixed (fast) speed.  Sometimes you
> can see the effect of the moving shutter, e. g. when photographing a
> propeller-driven aircraft.

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Robert Krawitz]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:29:23 -0800 (PST), kfj wrote:
>
> On 16 Nov., 09:25, JohnPW  wrote:
>> Ha! Just as I expected someone with a good knowledge of the subject
>> has responded as I wrote this.
>> ...
>> But I really think using a camera that can
>> take movies might be a good way to go (see below.) The idea being, the
>> more images you capture, the less of each one you use. Ideally you
>> would only end up using the very center most part of each image. Being
>> handy with scripting would help a lot here (I am definitely not!)
>
> This is really the idea of the line camera:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_line_camera
>
> Just a wild idea here: if I'm not mistaken, there are shutters which
> are made of a black piece of material with a slit, and the material is
> moved so that the slit moves over the sensor - okay, I checked myself,
> they are called focal plain shutters:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_plane_shutter

Almost all modern consumer and prosumer level cameras (and all of the
mainstream SLR systems) use focal plane shutters.  The alternative is
a leaf shutter, which needs to be built into the lens.  That was
common on rangefinder cameras, and many medium format and all large
format cameras use leaf shutters in the lens.

> now if you'd use such a device in a moving camera so that the slit was
> small, but the exposure was long (I'm not sure this can be done with
> these shutter as they come) you might end up with an image similar to
> what you'd get from a line camera. You might have to rotate the camera
> at the same time, or you might use a special lens that only shows a
> vertical strip anyway (cylindrical, I'd imagine?).

You can't do that with any focal plane shutter I'm aware of.  The
curtains of the shutter move at a fixed (fast) speed.  Sometimes you
can see the effect of the moving shutter, e. g. when photographing a
propeller-driven aircraft.

-- 
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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 16 Nov., 09:25, JohnPW  wrote:
> Ha! Just as I expected someone with a good knowledge of the subject
> has responded as I wrote this.

:-)

> ...
> But I really think using a camera that can
> take movies might be a good way to go (see below.) The idea being, the
> more images you capture, the less of each one you use. Ideally you
> would only end up using the very center most part of each image. Being
> handy with scripting would help a lot here (I am definitely not!)

This is really the idea of the line camera:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_line_camera

Just a wild idea here: if I'm not mistaken, there are shutters which
are made of a black piece of material with a slit, and the material is
moved so that the slit moves over the sensor - okay, I checked myself,
they are called focal plain shutters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_plane_shutter

now if you'd use such a device in a moving camera so that the slit was
small, but the exposure was long (I'm not sure this can be done with
these shutter as they come) you might end up with an image similar to
what you'd get from a line camera. You might have to rotate the camera
at the same time, or you might use a special lens that only shows a
vertical strip anyway (cylindrical, I'd imagine?).

Kay

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

Nice!
I knew it was possible. Good point on the manual editing of control
points. I meant to mention that too.
It looks like on a slant one might want some downward shots at the
high end and some upward shots at the low end (if one is seeking to
make a conventional crop.) Obviously this has it's limits in the
downward shots since parallax will increase as distance to the subject
decreases. But the upward shots wouldn't be a problem.

I definitely feel I have found my role in this community. I tramp
feerlessly in with half-assed comments which serve to stimulate others
to provide better advice :-)   I'm always glad to be of service. ;-)


--John

On Nov 16, 2:40 pm, Bruno Postle  wrote:
> On Tue 15-Nov-2011 at 21:25 -0800, Syv Ritch wrote:
>
>
>
> >I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
> >perpendicular, for the whole street.
> >I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
> >3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
> >houses on that street.
>
> This is the way to go if the building facades don't follow the
> street edge closely or there is lots of complex roof detail.  I put
> my notes for stitching linear mosaics 
> here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/36383814@N00/5830006193/
>
> --
> 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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic

[Bruno Postle]

On Tue 15-Nov-2011 at 21:25 -0800, Syv Ritch wrote:


I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
perpendicular, for the whole street.



I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
houses on that street.


This is the way to go if the building facades don't follow the 
street edge closely or there is lots of complex roof detail.  I put 
my notes for stitching linear mosaics here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/36383814@N00/5830006193/

--
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

Syv,
I emailed you a pdf example (not sure how to attach files in the list,
although I have seen that others have done it.)
I don't know how helpful it is, but perhaps it will give you an idea
of what to expect with even very casual hand held shots.

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

Ha! Just as I expected someone with a good knowledge of the subject
has responded as I wrote this.
He has pointed out all the relevant issues and has even brought up the
tutorial that inspired me to experiment (I can never find them again
when I want to!)
The parallax thing is the big issue, and the tutorial addresses it
well. But for some applications, it's not so important. As Kay points
out, many sins are forgiven if you place the camera well (see my
suggestions on that below.) But I really think using a camera that can
take movies might be a good way to go (see below.) The idea being, the
more images you capture, the less of each one you use. Ideally you
would only end up using the very center most part of each image. Being
handy with scripting would help a lot here (I am definitely not!)





Your English works for me!

Well, again I speak from theory rather than experience (or at least
very small scale experience.) This still depends on what you want to
achieve and also on the particular situation. Is this a paid job? What
does the client expect? Are these row houses? In that case you might
be able treat them more like a mosaic where the position and angle of
the camera is not so important. If they are suburban houses separated
from each other by greater distances it might be a different case.
Most of my experience is with  mostly flat subjects. Perhaps someone
else will chime in with an informed insight. In the meantime, I'll
theorize on it for you ;-)

You might get the most satisfying result by taking pictures at
somewhat regular intervals along a strict linear path while keeping
the camera 90º to the path. It probably doesn't need to be super exact
since if there is much depth variation it will not stitch together
seamlessly anyway. But I would make it a goal to keep the path
straight and the camera orthogonal to the line of the path. An HD
movie camera (or a DSLR with movie capability) with a wide angle lens
might be a good capture device, if the goal is to get a sidewalk view
from every point along the street. You could turn it to a portrait
orientation and just drive slowly down the street as you capture a few
images a second! Perhaps a tandem bike with you on the back? With a
conventional still camera and a tripod you can get greater resolution
and better quality images, but you probably don't want to capture
quite so many images. It might be ideal to make sure to take a picture
from directly in front of each house (straight up the walkway to the
door?) so that you get as flat of an elevation view for each house as
possible. Between each house how many pictures you need to take will
depend on the effect you want. an additional one centered half way
between houses and one centered on each corner of each house? Thats
four images per house.

I'm a great believer in small scale trials. Do a trial run on 2 or
three houses to see what works best for you.

-- John

On Nov 15, 11:25 pm, Syv Ritch  wrote:
> On 11/15/11, JohnPW  wrote:
>
> > At the risk of sounding like a moron (as I usually do) I'll respond.
>
> No you are not.
>
> > I've only recently experimented with this myself. But my initial
> > thought is, "Do you want a mosaic or a pano?"
> > Actually, it really sounds like you might want a linear pano rather
> > than a mosaic. Or possibly a series of partial panos joined into a
> > linear pano?
>
> Please forgive me but English is neither my first or my second language.
>
> I want one photo of the whole street, what you would call a "linear
> pano". Never heard of that expression before, but it makes sense.
>
> I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
> perpendicular, for the whole street.
>
> I used the word "mosaic" because a couple of month ago there was a
> thread on how to make a mosaic, and I thought that we were talking
> about the same thing.
>
> > Another approach (which you also touch on) is a linear
> > series of conventional panoramas (like Google StreetView.) But you
> > imply that you want to make partial panoramas and stitch them
> > together into one large, long image like a linear panorama.
> > So maybe you haven't decided for sure what your final product should
> > be? What is your aim?
>
> I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
> 3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
> houses on that street.
>
> Thanks

-- 
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: Mosaic

[kfj]

On 16 Nov., 06:25, Syv Ritch  wrote:
> On 11/15/11, JohnPW  wrote:
>

> > I've only recently experimented with this myself. But my initial
> > thought is, "Do you want a mosaic or a pano?"
> > Actually, it really sounds like you might want a linear pano rather
> > than a mosaic. Or possibly a series of partial panos joined into a
> > linear pano?
>
> I want one photo of the whole street, what you would call a "linear
> pano". Never heard of that expression before, but it makes sense.

Have a look at

http://wiki.panotools.org/Stitching_a_photo-mosaic

John has explained what the two modes are: panoramas are taken from a
single point, and mosaics are of planar (2D) scenes (graffiti,
mosaics, flloors, maps..). Why just these two? Why not 3D scenes from
different viewpoints? Because only these two modes aren't troubled by
parallax, see

http://wiki.panotools.org/Parallax

If you're taking images of houses in a street, chances are you'll not
just have a single long flat facade but individual houses with stuff
like front lawns, trees, fences, gaps between houses etc.. You just
can't take matching images of these features from different
viewpoints, and therefore you can't stitch them automatically.

To still get what you want, you can use special hardware like a line
scan camera (or simulate one) - or you can blend your images manually
so that the parallactic problems are less visible, which starts with
carefully selecting the positions for individual shots, which is a
specific technique in itself, have a look at

http://panospace.wordpress.com/2010/09/19/linear-panoramas-mosaic-tutorial/

You'll see that the subject chosen was quite planar, and even then it
took some careful work to get it stitched all right. With individual
houses like in your case chances are the parallactic differences will
be too big to retouch.

Best of luck

Kay

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic

[Syv Ritch]

On 11/15/11, JohnPW  wrote:
> At the risk of sounding like a moron (as I usually do) I'll respond.

No you are not.

> I've only recently experimented with this myself. But my initial
> thought is, "Do you want a mosaic or a pano?"
> Actually, it really sounds like you might want a linear pano rather
> than a mosaic. Or possibly a series of partial panos joined into a
> linear pano?

Please forgive me but English is neither my first or my second language.

I want one photo of the whole street, what you would call a "linear
pano". Never heard of that expression before, but it makes sense.

I want one long photo that is like standing in front of each house,
perpendicular, for the whole street.

I used the word "mosaic" because a couple of month ago there was a
thread on how to make a mosaic, and I thought that we were talking
about the same thing.

> Another approach (which you also touch on) is a linear
> series of conventional panoramas (like Google StreetView.) But you
> imply that you want to make partial panoramas and stitch them
> together into one large, long image like a linear panorama.
> So maybe you haven't decided for sure what your final product should
> be? What is your aim?

I thought of doing many small panos of 2 images and each one covering
3 to 4 houses. I was going to do the panos to simplify, there are 37
houses on that street.

Thanks

-- 
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: Mosaic

[JohnPW]

At the risk of sounding like a moron (as I usually do) I'll respond.
I've only recently experimented with this myself. But my initial
thought is, "Do you want a mosaic or a pano?"
Actually, it really sounds like you might want a linear pano rather
than a mosaic. Or possibly a series of partial panos joined into a
linear pano?

I have to admit, I'm not sure of the correct use and meaning of terms
(or even if there is a hard and set definition for them.) But when
someone says "pano" I think multiple images of a 3D subject taken from
one viewpoint to facilitate smooth joining of the images to create a
single immersive image of some kind (often creating a equirectangular
or closely related finished image. When someone says "mosaic" I think
of multiple pictures taken of a single 2D planar subject which can be
taken from many viewpoints to facilitate stitching them into a single
usually rectilinear image. When you want to take a picture of many
subjects along a street it's a bit of a 'tweener in that there are
multiple 3D subjects distributed along a linear path. I would call
this a linear panorama. I don't know if that's a good or descriptive
name, but it seems to straddle the other two with an aim that is more
informally documentary and in some ways less perfectionistic in
technique. Another approach (which you also touch on) is a linear
series of conventional panoramas (like Google StreetView.) But you
imply that you want to make partial panoramas and stitch them
together into one large, long image like a linear panorama.
So maybe you haven't decided for sure what your final product should
be? What is your aim?


On Nov 15, 7:56 pm, Syv Ritch  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to photograph a whole street. I was thinking of doing a mosaic.
> Any suggestion for taking the photos?
>
> I was planning of doing a whole bunch of small panos, just 2 images. I
> have an NN, then move to the next 3 houses... Any better way?
>
> Thanks

-- 
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: mosaic mode maths - an equation, please!

[kfj]

On 10 Dez., 23:59, "T. Modes"  wrote:
> No equation, but a description can be found in the wiki:

http://wiki.panotools.org/Stiching_a_photo-mosaic

Thank you very much! I was confused, because I thought the Z axis was
going the other way. Now it all became clear: you can have Z values
down to -1, which is when you actually touch the projection plane.
With Z values <= -1 you can't see anything, since the virtual camera
position is on or behind the plane. With rising Z values you move away
fron the projection plane - if an image with the same hfov is then
projected onto the plane, it becomes ever bigger with rising Z values.
So it's linear after all, just my understanding was nonlinear ;-)

So I suppose the following holds true (with rectilinear projection,
all other parameters at default values):

Let d be the distance of the virtual camera from the image plane: d =
Z + 1 , Z > -1

If an image is projected with different Z values, the output sizes
will differ by a scaling factor proportional to the respective d
values

e.g. if an image is processed once with Z = -0.25 and once with +0.5,
the resulting second projection will be twice as large (in width and
height; surface will be four times as large) as the first, since

d1 =  -0.25 + 1 = 0.75
d2 = 0.5 + 1 = 1.5
d2 = 2 * d1

with regards
Kay

-- 
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: mosaic mode maths - an equation, please!

[T. Modes]

No equation, but a description can be found in the wiki:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Stiching_a_photo-mosaic

-- 
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: mosaic mode maths - an equation, please!

[kfj]

Hi all!

Maybe my request was overlooked, so I take the liberty to push it up
to the top of the list again before I try again under a different and
maybe more tempting heading ;-)
I did try to look into the code, and gave up after half an hour - I
just couldn't find where the calculation is done.

with regards
Kay

On 7 Dez., 16:59, kfj <_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
> There is a guy who needs to know how varying the Z parameter
> translates into a scaling factor. I thought this was straightforward,
> but found it is not: I thought the Z parameter translates into a
> linear distance along the optical axis measured from the center of the
> panosphere, since the X and Y parameters translate into linear shifts
> parallel to the image plane. This would be easy. But I can set Z
> beyond 1.0, even up to 100 and further, and the image 'comes closer'
> but I never quite get there. So it must be some asymptotic nonlinear
> function, and I can't be bothered poking around in the code to find
> the formula. Maybe someone can just tell me what it is or point me to
> the appropriate place?

-- 
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] Re: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[Bruno Postle]

You can put a photo 'on top' in the preview by using the Identify mode, move 
the mouse pointer over the image numbers and each appears on top in turn. You 
can permanently put a photo on top by rearranging the list of photos in the 
Images tab.

-- 
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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[Oskar Sander]

Yes,  agree.  The idea with deliberate selections sounds really good.

Is there a way today to make an image to end up "on top" in the
preview?   This would help draging as well as verifying
alignment/contribution of one specific image without having to turn
off adjacent images.

Cheers
/O



2010/10/31 Yuval Levy :
> Hi Darko,
>
> On October 29, 2010 10:59:44 am Darko Makreshanski wrote:
>> On 10/29/2010 10:22 AM, voschix wrote:
>> > 5.  the possibility to move, and zoom in and out in the preview window
>> > without changing the X, Y parameters.
>>
>> Hi, you can use the new 'Overview' in mosaic mode and zoom in/out and
>> move around the scene. Also I believe you can use the Overview to drag
>> the images as well. (only in a group though)
>
> If I am not mistaken 'Overview' mode is still in a development branch?
>
> I think it is becoming an expressed need and I add my voice, repeating what I
> expressed on the GSoC 2010 mentors list that (after the
> gsoc2010_panorama_overview integration) we should add:
>
> * more flexible dragging of images in preview mode.  right now it is only in a
> group, and the CPs link such a group.  I'd  like to move individual images;
> individual stacks;  deliberate selections of images (shift-click to add/remove
> to/from selection)
>
> * *real* zoom in and out in the preview mode, as opposed to changing output
> parameters with the FOV slider
>
> Yuv
>



-- 
/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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[Yuval Levy]

Hi Darko,

On October 29, 2010 10:59:44 am Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> On 10/29/2010 10:22 AM, voschix wrote:
> > 5.  the possibility to move, and zoom in and out in the preview window
> > without changing the X, Y parameters.
> 
> Hi, you can use the new 'Overview' in mosaic mode and zoom in/out and
> move around the scene. Also I believe you can use the Overview to drag
> the images as well. (only in a group though)

If I am not mistaken 'Overview' mode is still in a development branch?

I think it is becoming an expressed need and I add my voice, repeating what I 
expressed on the GSoC 2010 mentors list that (after the 
gsoc2010_panorama_overview integration) we should add:

* more flexible dragging of images in preview mode.  right now it is only in a 
group, and the CPs link such a group.  I'd  like to move individual images; 
individual stacks;  deliberate selections of images (shift-click to add/remove 
to/from selection)

* *real* zoom in and out in the preview mode, as opposed to changing output 
parameters with the FOV slider

Yuv


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[Oskar Sander]

Cool Darko, should I enter a bug for it?

How about the translation ratio? Is that an effect of the x,y movement from
the mouse translating to something different on the panosphere?

Cheers
/O

2010/10/29 Darko Makreshanski 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 10/29/2010 10:22 AM, voschix wrote:
>
>> 5.  the possibility to move, and zoom in and out in the preview window
>> without changing the X, Y parameters.
>>
>>
>>
> Hi, you can use the new 'Overview' in mosaic mode and zoom in/out and move
> around the scene. Also I believe you can use the Overview to drag the images
> as well. (only in a group though)
>
>  On Oct 28, 10:04 pm, Oskar Sander  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> 2 When dragging in mosaic mode, there is a trace line that does not seem
>>> to
>>>
>>> make sense. What does it mean?  Is this something that works with normal
>>> drag only?
>>>
>>>
>>
>  3 When dragging, there is not direct correspondence with the movement, and
>>> the mouse translation.  Is this because I'm looking at the transformed
>>> result but modifying an indirect parameter, or is this wrong?   Anyhow,
>>> it
>>> would be useful to get it more responsive, either if it possible to
>>> compute
>>> the transform for each image movement if possible, or if that is to
>>> complicated, at least to have a "gear" to move the image in for example
>>> 1x,
>>> 2x and 4x
>>>
>>>
>> As I have done the dragging in mosaic mode as the sample patch for GSOC, I
> might explain some things.
>
> The trace should correspond with the trace when you are dragging in normal
> mode, and it represent the motion on the theoretical panosphere.
>
> Ideally when you are dragging in mosaic mode the photos that you are
> dragging should drag with the trace, however instead of y,p,r the x,y,z
> parameters are changed.
> This however doesn't happen currently so it's a bug, that I will look into
> when I get a chance.
>
> Best,
> Darko
>
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
/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

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[Darko Makreshanski]

Hi,

On 10/29/2010 10:22 AM, voschix wrote:

5.  the possibility to move, and zoom in and out in the preview window
without changing the X, Y parameters.

   
Hi, you can use the new 'Overview' in mosaic mode and zoom in/out and 
move around the scene. Also I believe you can use the Overview to drag 
the images as well. (only in a group though)



On Oct 28, 10:04 pm, Oskar Sander  wrote:
   

2 When dragging in mosaic mode, there is a trace line that does not seem to
make sense. What does it mean?  Is this something that works with normal
drag only?
 



3 When dragging, there is not direct correspondence with the movement, and
the mouse translation.  Is this because I'm looking at the transformed
result but modifying an indirect parameter, or is this wrong?   Anyhow, it
would be useful to get it more responsive, either if it possible to compute
the transform for each image movement if possible, or if that is to
complicated, at least to have a "gear" to move the image in for example 1x,
2x and 4x
 
As I have done the dragging in mosaic mode as the sample patch for GSOC, 
I might explain some things.


The trace should correspond with the trace when you are dragging in 
normal mode, and it represent the motion on the theoretical panosphere.


Ideally when you are dragging in mosaic mode the photos that you are 
dragging should drag with the trace, however instead of y,p,r the x,y,z 
parameters are changed.
This however doesn't happen currently so it's a bug, that I will look 
into when I get a chance.


Best,
Darko

--
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: Mosaic mode - experience & questions

[voschix]

I also have started playing with the new mosaic features. In my case I
am trying to assemble horizontal one-line pseudo-panoramas of the
waterfront in Venice, shot from a moving vaporetto.

In addition to Oskar's points 1, 2, and 3 I would like to add two
other points to the wish list:

5.  the possibility to move, and zoom in and out in the preview window
without changing the X, Y parameters.

6. the possibility to independently change the y, p, r parameters of a
single image in the preview window without affecting the values of the
other images. At present this happens even if you untick the
corresponding lock filed. It only works independently at present when
you insert the changes as numbers in the corresponding boxes in the
main window.

Volker

On Oct 28, 10:04 pm, Oskar Sander  wrote:
> I've played a bit with some of the mosaic mode features and some thoughts
> comes to my mind.
>
> *Background*
>
> I'm working on a project I'm expanding with several lines of mosaic-style
> photos. This is an example using 40 images in 3 vertical lines out of 20
> lines[1], I have up to now only focues on the decking image plane, the
> railing on the sides is not optimezed, you se how the perspective messes
> these up.
>
> I'm iteratively:
>
> 1 adding a line of photos
> 2 Giving a preliminary X and Y offset  to separate them in the preview.
> (0,0 in the middle, and adding 1 for each line and 1 for each image up and
> down)
> 3 Dragging images in place with mosaic mode
> 4 Adding CP between consecutive photos in each line
> 5 Optimizing the line separately
> 6 Connecting the lines in a few places to the previous line, and optimizing
> the connected photos, these become anchors in the line.
> 7 Optimizing the line with anchors fixed  (X,Y only)
> (8 experimenting with adding r, and Z to optimization)
>
> *Thoughts & questions*
>
> 1 When dragging it would be really really usefull to override the CP
> connections and drag images separately.  Now I have to throw away my CPs and
> add them back later.   (I know this has been discussed)
>
> 2 When dragging in mosaic mode, there is a trace line that does not seem to
> make sense. What does it mean?  Is this something that works with normal
> drag only?
>
> 3 In the preview I work a lot with turning images on and off to be able to
> drag them in place.  What would be really useful is to be able to put an
> image "on top" by selecting it's image button in a special way, i.e. right
> click.  Another thing would be to be able to turn on a highlight frame, just
> like is used in the identify function.    Maybe these functions are already
> there, or similar?
>
> 3 When dragging, there is not direct correspondence with the movement, and
> the mouse translation.  Is this because I'm looking at the transformed
> result but modifying an indirect parameter, or is this wrong?   Anyhow, it
> would be useful to get it more responsive, either if it possible to compute
> the transform for each image movement if possible, or if that is to
> complicated, at least to have a "gear" to move the image in for example 1x,
> 2x and 4x
>
> 4 These images are frame grabs from a video camera in an underwater housing,
> and I don't have the sensor, lens and housing data for.   So in this project
> I have just been guessing on a FOV.   Is there a way to calculate this out
> of my mosaics image base?  I don't have a "classical" panorama to start with
> unfortunately.
>
> Cheers
> /O
>
> [1]http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/nCG-LrCDyE2Y_-OHKmDCiA?feat=dire...

-- 
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: Mosaic drag mode + keeping Tr parameters consistency on roll patch (vetting exercise)

[darko]

> I could have also easily added the TrZ parameter, however this would
> help much.
>

I meant wouldn't help much

-- 
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

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.