I see what you mean. We have no guarantee that the seam will land exactly in the same place for all exposures... leaving fusing them beforehand the best option. Thanks for the explanation.
nick On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Bart van Andel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Then there is something I probably don't understand... > > > > I thought that once nona was run, enblend and enfuse had no impact to > > alignment, everything had already been calculated\preprocessed. enblend > and > > enfuse would only use this information. > > I think you understand that part correctly. > > However, with less than absolutely perfect alignment, the 3 exposures > might differ somewhat when using the approach you suggest. When > overlaying these 3 blended images, this may show up as blurred edges, > for instance, because of the "improper" alignment in the per exposure > blending steps. > > You won't notice this when looking at just one exposure at the time: > they will be fine, but slightly different from each other. > > Please correct me if I'm wrong (confirming I'm right is also okay, to > get things straight) > > -- > Bart > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
