, including the plane yaw and pitch parameters improved the
optimisation ( though not always by much ) but had no significant effect
on the stitch itself. So it's probably better to leave the plane pitch
and yaw parameters out of the optimisation.
Roger Broadie
-Original Message-
From: paul
invoking it.
Roger
On 30 August 2017 at 09:38, bugbear <bugb...@papermule.co.uk> wrote:
> Roger Broadie wrote:
>
>> Of course, long linear features can offer control-point detectors
>> difficulties if there are no distinguishing details on or near them. But in
>>
ble, spans the discontinuity. Indeed,
several of these spread along the band of discontinuities may be enough to
push the optimiser into aligning the various pairs of sections.
Roger Broadie
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 5:22:37 PM UTC+1, Any One wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a series of old
On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 7:44:50 AM UTC+1, mak...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I face a problem when taking pictures in a comms rooms - see attached
> pictures of a single rack.
> I can take pictures from 50-60cm only and therefore cannot get the full
> picture, just details. All
landscape aspect images?
Roger Broadie
On 24 June 2017 at 11:33, Roger Broadie <brf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, Paul, you are absolutely right and your pto file shows you had
> indeed chosen a rectilinear output projection. So the barrel
> distortion visible in your output
the ground, because Hugin - in the cases I tried -
allotted the
images what I take to be its ultimate default, a field-of-view of 50 degrees.
Or you could press Escape to close the window and simply create a few control
points
by hand to give Hugin something to work on.
Roger Broadie
stitching flaw in a straight
line that did not
appear when I used the built-in stitcher. But that had its own similar small
flaw elsewhere, so you have to take your pick as to which you prefer.
Roger Broadie
Message Received: Jan 13 2017, 01:11 PM
From
day, January 9, 2017 at 10:25:23 AM UTC, Roger Broadie wrote:
>
> Thanks, John, but the Preferences only offer the choice of Enblend and the
> built-in blender. My question was how to roll back the version of Enblend
> that is used.
>
Sorry, my installed Hugin was
Message Received: Jan 09 2017, 07:31 AM
From: "panostar"
To: "hugin and other free panoramic software"
Cc: mem...@ogea.freeserve.co.uk
Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Why is part of the stitched image black?
On Sunday, January 8, 2017 at 9:25:29 PM UTC, Roger Broadie wrote
that the more you give the optimiser to play with the better
result you get (provided there are enough control points, of course). In other
words
variations in b are used to adjust the relationships between the images.
Roger Broadie
Message Received: Dec
Sorry - it might have been more helpful to have reported the following
earlier.
I'm running under 64-bit Windows 8.1 and get the problem of Hugin's
crashing when I try to invoke the Help function in both the 2014 and the
2015 versions of Hugin.
I can't remember how I installed the 2014
probably only worth doing if there are problems and
it may be possible to restrict it to individual images.
Roger Broadie
-Original Message-
From: paul womack pwom...@papermule.co.uk
To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu 28 May 2015 11:37:33
Subject: [hugin-ptx] mosaic, confusion
features like buttresses and receding features like windows from
straight-on and then select those versions with masking. I think there
was an early tutorial on the topic.
Roger Broadie
-Original Message-
From: bugbear bugb...@papermule.co.uk
To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu 28
and Pitch
parameters. It has an error of 0.5 average and 2.9 maximum, but is for
a panorama of only about half the width of yours. Still pretty good,
though, even at the full size.
Roger Broadie
-Original Message-
From: paul womack pwom...@papermule.co.uk
To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
blenders exclude it by putting the seam
roughly in the middle of the overlap area. I wonder if masking out the
blurred areas would help.
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you
should have thought, have produced
the blurring seen. And there was a slight jink noticeable in the
left-hand border of the image area in the stitched output. Of course
both these imperfections might be the result of a poor choice of control
points.
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked
are
of different sizes.
Roger Broadie
--
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
that they introduced little
distortion.
Roger Broadie
--
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
and, for the record, a
revised file for the small-angle approach.
Roger Broadie
--
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
if there are features from which they can be
defined. But you may have problems if there are voids in your coverage.
It may help, at least as a first step, to locate the extreme parameter
values and reset them to 0 or a plausible value.
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked questions
John Muccigrosso wrote on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 at 07:48:57 -0800 (PST)
-
Thanks for the help. I'll try these approaches.
Sometimes I've found that the stitch will work even when the Fast
Preview is goofy like this, but not in this case.
Also the control points look good, which is why I'm
know are already aligned.
Roger Broadie
--
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
in optimisation could be achieved by allowing other
parameters to vary for the non-anchor image, but in the example I tried
they had no noticeable effect on the end result.
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received
than -1 is a sure sign that the optimiser has failed,
presumably because of something to do with the way you fed it with
parameters.
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 13:14:31 +0200 Marius Loots sent us his pto file to
stitch Bugbear's images (of a map of Norwich, I think).
I too was impressed by the quality of Marius's result. I wondered if it
was attributable to his workflow, or to his new set of control points.
I therefore generated
I got annoyed with PTBatcherGUI getting in the way of my shutting
Windows down. Then it dawned on me that, as I never stitched more than
one project at a time, I hardly needed a batch stitcher. So I switched
it off:
File/Preferences/Stitching/Processor=Hugin_stitch_project
Roger Broadie
. So it would be worth seeing
if allowing Yaw and Plane Yaw and Pitch and Plane Pitch all to vary
under optimisation improves the result in Hugin.
Good luck
Roger Broadie
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received
27 matches
Mail list logo
