Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: T. Modes wrote: Thanks for stripping down. That makes debugging a lot easier. I found the issue and fixed in changeset daffca65ed45. It was an issue with the translation parameters and the center pano horizontal function, so on the first look total unrelated to the the

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: But this capture fault applies (sadly) to the whole pano, but the particular difficulty only arises in one corner. So - how good should I expect the result to be? I have cut the problem down to a 4 image pano, which can be downloaded (for the next week) from this link:

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

On 21 October 2015 11:25:38 BST, bugbear wrote: > >As such, the lighting (just an archive room) was not only non uniform, >but the map was in a different place (relative to the lighting) for >each >session. In this example, the visual discontinuity "just happens" >to be on a session boundary. >

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Bruno Postle wrote: On 21 October 2015 11:25:38 BST, bugbear wrote: As such, the lighting (just an archive room) was not only non uniform, but the map was in a different place (relative to the lighting) for each session. In this example, the visual discontinuity "just happens" to be on a

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

On 21 October 2015 at 11:47, bugbear wrote: >> >> In this situation you need to calibrate vignetting and camera response >> separately - then only optimise exposure and white balance in a project >> where shadows move around. > > I'm not sure how that would work; the

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

T. Modes wrote: Thanks for stripping down. That makes debugging a lot easier. I found the issue and fixed in changeset daffca65ed45. It was an issue with the translation parameters and the center pano horizontal function, so on the first look total unrelated to the the photometric optimizer.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: bugbear wrote: I will now try my 173 image (*) "big map" That worked too (took a while though...) I hereby declare the bug fixed ;-) "Darn" I was premature. The optimisation was indeed (as of 7/10/2015) much better. But whilst trying to tweak it, I discovered another

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Stefan Peter wrote: Please check it out and let the list know if your problems are fixed. With kind regards I have downloaded that version, and ran it on a small failure case (I deliberately had my camera on aperture priority mode, since light levels in the room could change - it had

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: I will now try my 173 image (*) "big map" That worked too (took a while though...) I hereby declare the bug fixed ;-) BugBear -- A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ --- You received this message because you are

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Am Mittwoch, 7. Oktober 2015 11:37:51 UTC+2 schrieb bugbear: > > And ... I've run headlong into another. > > I was attempting to add another image, one with > a reference card in short, to the big pano. > > I got "(hugin:10422): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_new: assertion > 'width > 0'

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: I've added this to launchpad; #1500342 exposure optimiser incorrectly ignoring some pairs I note that this is now "Fixed in changeset f2e38d537544" Can anyone tell me (or estimate) how long such a fix will take to emerge in the packagers PPA? BugBear -- A list of

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

bugbear wrote: I had a look at your project, to see if I could learn something. I see the same behaviour here. I experimented a bit, and found that by dragging the images so they both have much smaller pitch values, the exposure optimises OK. I know it's not an answer to your question.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Terry Duell wrote: Hello Paul, On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 23:28:52 +1000, paul womack wrote: [snip] When I try to optimise the exposure I get the error message "no overlapping points found, Photometric optimisation aborted", but the preview clearly shows an extensive

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Hello Paul, On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 23:28:52 +1000, paul womack wrote: [snip] When I try to optimise the exposure I get the error message "no overlapping points found, Photometric optimisation aborted", but the preview clearly shows an extensive overlap area between

[hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Under what conditions would the exposure parameters for an image remain unchanged (and, as far as I can tell, wrong) under exposure optimisation? I have a fairly mundane capture of a map, taken with a pano head, and the light changed during the capture sequence. In any case, I was using

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

A quick 'n' dirty trial shows substantial improvement. I'll pursue this further. Thanks for the help. BugBear On 21 September 2015 at 21:04, Paul Womack wrote: > Ah - I was optimising "everything", so your advice may well be what I > need. I'll try it and report back.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

Since I don't have a wide angle lens (only 38mm) I have to take a lot of shots; HDR on top of that becomes a lot of work. I took a semi-spherical of my garden to use as a Stellarium landscape, and it was 67 images. At f4.5, Shutter speeds varied from 1/800 for the sky to the South, to 1/15 in the

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

On 21 September 2015 11:02:10 BST, paul womack wrote: >Under what conditions would the exposure parameters for an image remain >unchanged (and, as far as I can tell, wrong) under exposure >optimisation? When exposure optimisation misbehaves, then you need to try these, in order: reset to

Re: [hugin-ptx] Exposure tab - troubles

2015-09-21 7:02 GMT-03:00 paul womack : > I was > using auto-exposure so as to ensure that the captured data > had the least chance of being blown out or filled in. > Usually I do the opposite and I've always seen that a panorama should be shot in manual mode keeping the