The rsp looks good - nice and smooth, which makes sense as Photosphere seems to have no trouble with these values. I also tried straight decimal format, and still no luck...
Very curious... On May 13, 2013, at 1:31 PM, Axel Jacobs wrote: > Right, so we are on the right track--hdrgen no longer rejects the RSP. > > Next question is: how good is the RSP? Try plotting it. If it is smooth and > monotonic, without any kinks in it, it's a good one. Otherwise, try > generating it from a different sequence. The 5D is used a lot on WebHDR: > http://www.jaloxa.eu/webhdr/cameras/Canon__Canon_EOS_5D.shtml > How does your RSP compare with the averaged one? Note that there is no > quality control, and even 'wonky' ones make it into the average. > > Axel > > > > On 05/13/2013 09:21 PM, Michael Martinez wrote: >> Using a 4 in front of the Photosphere numbers like this: >> >> 4 7.135383e-03 -3.556814e-02 2.441168e+00 -5.786777e+00 4.462320e+00 >> 4 4.543790e-03 3.363440e-02 1.917460e+00 -4.660105e+00 3.792747e+00 >> 4 3.956902e-03 3.244581e-02 1.827308e+00 -4.505138e+00 3.729707e+00 >> >> unfortunately results in a wonky HDR with garbage luminance values and >> strage visual artifacts - see screen shot here >> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28677369/Screen%20shot%202013-05-13%20at%201.17.33%20PM.png>. >> >> >> compared to a screenshot of the photosphere created HDR >> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28677369/Screen%20shot%202013-05-13%20at%201.17.55%20PM.png> >> >> >> >> >> >> On May 13, 2013, at 1:05 PM, Axel Jacobs wrote: >> >>> Oops, >>> >>> try '4 ', not '6 ' as per my last post. >>> >>> Embarrassingly yours > > > _______________________________________________ > HDRI mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/hdri _______________________________________________ HDRI mailing list [email protected] http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/hdri
