2010/4/7 Yuval Levy
> On March 31, 2010 01:17:42 pm Bruno Postle wrote:
> > Hugin is already overly complex, and users don't appreciate the
> > possibilities of infinite combinations of options. Just because we can
> > show the control points in Drag mode, it doesn't mean we should
>
> +1
>
+1
On March 31, 2010 01:17:42 pm Bruno Postle wrote:
> Hugin is already overly complex, and users don't appreciate the
> possibilities of infinite combinations of options. Just because we can
> show the control points in Drag mode, it doesn't mean we should
+1
for the occasional user less is better
Bruno Postle wrote:
On 30 March 2010 23:03, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
Bruno Postle wrote:
like the idea of a view of a globe showing the entire sphere around
the camera
With all this info, I think remapping the photos is superfluous and
would confuse the clarity of the feature
> Hugin is already overly complex, and users don't appreciate the
> possibilities of infinite combinations of options. Just because we can
> show the control points in Drag mode, it doesn't mean we should - I
> would rather enhance Show Points into a separate mode that also
> highlights areas of th
On 30 March 2010 23:03, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> Bruno Postle wrote:
>> I like the idea of a view of a globe showing the entire sphere around
>> the camera
>> With all this info, I think remapping the photos is superfluous and
>> would confuse the clarity of the feature as a diagram. Also if
Bruno Postle wrote:
Fancy effects are a good thing, the more fun Hugin is to use the
better. So I really like the idea of animating the transitions between
projections.
The idea with the transitions was actually to animate unfolding of the
sphere to explain the nature of projections.
The tran
On 29 March 2010 16:27, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> I'm actually still not sure what is the general opinion about this feature,
> since apart from James, no one else has commented on it.
Some thoughts from me, though there are more ideas already in this
thread than can be implemented in one proje
On March 29, 2010 11:27:09 am Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> This system would contain both the spherical model without
> Tr parameters and the mosaic model with Tr parameters. In the mosaic
> model the hypothetical plane would also be rendered.
sorry, my confusion. I mixed up Tr parameters with Tx,T
Yuval Levy wrote:
On March 21, 2010 05:44:49 pm Darko Makreshanski wrote:
this mode wouldn't represent the output, but would represent an
overview of the panorama in 3D space
if you want to represent the panorama in 3D space properly, a Photosynth-like
approach is better than the pano
On March 21, 2010 05:44:49 pm Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> this mode wouldn't represent the output, but would represent an
> overview of the panorama in 3D space
if you want to represent the panorama in 3D space properly, a Photosynth-like
approach is better than the panosphere.
Each picture is l
James Legg wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 16:55 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
Darko Makreshanski wrote:
James Legg wrote:
Have you thought about how the z-order of the images would work in the
outside sphere view?
The overlapping images in Hugin eventually get merged with e
I have been going through the code for fast preview and I have come up
with some initial ideas how to tackle the problem for zooming in the
preview.
1. Meshes:
Upon each remapping of a mesh, the remappers (or something else) would
also create a bounding box for each mesh which will be used f
On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 16:55 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> > James Legg wrote:
> >>
> >> Have you thought about how the z-order of the images would work in the
> >> outside sphere view?
> >>
> >> The overlapping images in Hugin eventually get merged with enblend.
Darko Makreshanski wrote:
James Legg wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 00:57 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
Yes, the equirectangular would be most suitable to convert to a 3D
mesh.
Basically I was thinking of projecting all of the images separately,
each with its center as the center of project
> The only logical explanation I could think of, which is consistent with the
> result in the preview, is that the images with non zero x,y,z parameters are
> represented on a sphere with a shifted center, however the projection is
> still done from the original center.
> This actually could also b
James Legg wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 00:57 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
Yes, the equirectangular would be most suitable to convert to a 3D mesh.
Basically I was thinking of projecting all of the images separately,
each with its center as the center of projection. Then to convert each
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 00:57 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> Yes, the equirectangular would be most suitable to convert to a 3D mesh.
> Basically I was thinking of projecting all of the images separately,
> each with its center as the center of projection. Then to convert each
> projection in
James Legg wrote:
On Sun, 2010-03-21 at 22:44 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
This means
that the remappers would need to be refactored or reimplemented to
return a 3D texturized mesh.
You should set up an equirectangular projection that is 360 degrees by
180 degrees, then either:
On Sun, 2010-03-21 at 22:44 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> The 3D panosphere mode would have very little in common with the current
> projection mode. So it will not use the current projection techniques to
> display the result (rectilinear for inside and orthographic for outside
> look) but
Hi,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
First, just let me clarify something for everyone, which I should have
done in the previous mail.
The 3D panosphere mode would have very little in common with the current
projection mode. So it will not use the current projection techniques to
display the re
On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 17:15 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some ideas which I would like to present and get feedback of you
> for a project. It basically includes the "Zooming for Fast Preview" and
> other improvements to "Fast Preview"
>
> My ideas are mostly concerned for u
Hi,
I have some ideas which I would like to present and get feedback of you
for a project. It basically includes the "Zooming for Fast Preview" and
other improvements to "Fast Preview"
My ideas are mostly concerned for users that are just beginning with
hugin, and users with not much knowled
22 matches
Mail list logo
