I agree it would be good to limit the search between relevan groups of images, When I tested the layoutbranch when that was requested from the community at the beginning of October. I had some CP issues in my projects then, and I was thinking along you lines too.
I used APSCpp and I manually selected relevant groups of adjacent images to search between in a project of in total 50 images. the images were very difficult with low contrast and near monochrome features. Interestingly enough the groups of images I selected *did seem *to matter for the resulting CP found. Different (more) CPs were found if I selected a subset rather than the whole project. Unfortunately I could not understand the pattern enough to file a bug report (And I don't know where to file it for APSCpp and to whom) My thinking is that, either it is a bug in the pairing that throws the search off if the search space gets too big. OR there may be an adaptive threshold of required match in order to deem a valid pair and the threshold gets different depending on the image and feature points set. So with these images that are difficult, I think it would be possible to make a less discriminate feature search based on the layout of the pictures. In the end I have not managed to complete this project as automatic CP detection only worked for say 20% of all overlaps. Cheers 2009/11/27 Tom Sharpless <tksharpl...@gmail.com> > > Neither approach is optimal. The right way to handle big image sets > would be to use prior knowledge of how they are layed out -- the > photographer almost always knows that -- to limit pairwise matching > just to the pairs that have some chance of overlapping. > > It would not be hard to change Panomatic to do pooled matching. That > would make it faster than autopano-sift-c, since it finds interest > points considerably faster. I almost did that back when I was working > on APSCpp, but was not sure about Anael's feelings about foreign > branches, so I didn't. > > Also, being a perfectionist, I really wanted to wait until we were in > a position to do layout-based matching, that is, until Hugin (or any > other front end, for that matter) was able to routinely capture > nominal image positions and pass those to the CP finder. I am not > sure if that day has arrived yet, but if it has, it would be good if > someone would add layout-based matching to Panomatic and APSCpp both. > > -- /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
