Seb Perez-D a écrit : > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 01:08, tennevin yves <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Compare this one (enfused) http://flickr.com/photos/styeb/3071381838/ >> to this one (hdr) http://flickr.com/photos/styeb/3070564323/ >> The exposures were -1 , 0 +1 EV >> > > The result of the enfuse image is very strange - it does not match at > all my experience. What parameters did you use to generate it? have > you tried changing the number of levels? > > Here is a 9 exposure image that I could share if people are interested: > http://flickr.com/photos/sbprzd/2127762078/ > > And here is the use of enfuse on the Erik Reinhard's example (see > description): > http://flickr.com/photos/sbprzd/2699695242 > > Cheers, > > Seb >
Did some new testing with exr vs fused photographs, this seems fine when using 7 exposures here. hdr version - http://flickr.com/photos/styeb/3272987108/ fused version - http://flickr.com/photos/styeb/3272983032/ My main issue is that hugin is still slower than picturenaut, now there are cases where picturenaut fails miserably... (either at aligning the images or either with detecting the bracketing) So my opinion is that it's better than nothing for those cases. I'll try with some panorama to see what it gives. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
