Curious to get a speed comparison from other people... specially those who generated giant panorama. For these 2 examples, this is only the stitch part. The control point and all is already done. The output is all 3 exposures layers, and the enfused final.
Running 30 images in 8 bit,15 mpix each, generating the largest 360*180 possible (around 18000*9000) could run within an hour or two. Now I'm running 120 images in 16 bits,again 15mpix each and outputting a 25000*12500. It has been running over 24 hours and counting... As a reference, I run a 64 bit 3.0ghz quad core on vista, and am (still) running the 32 bit hugin RC4 with updated APSC. Oh, and added -m2000 on enblend and enfuse to be sure they use all the memory they can. IO seems to be a problem in the end, but to help, I'm running from an external drive in raid. Are these reasonable values? any other options to speed up the process? thanks, nick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
