I'll contact him, but this is where I got the source and the win32 binary for comparison.
nick On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Harry van der Wolf <[email protected]>wrote: > Naouel's homepage is at http://aorlinsk2.free.fr/panomatic/ > > He also has windows binaries there and you can also find the source there. > Maybe if you get in direct contact with him you might get your answers. > > Harry > > 2009/11/21 Nicolas Pelletier <[email protected]> > >> Hi, >> >> Many questions about panomatic (btw, still targetting to setup and help on >> windows, but this itched a little more) >> >> First, is there a reason that the panomatic project on SF has files but no >> source? >> >> Second, if I don't want to get into trouble with patent... where is the >> limit? >> - Publishing the source? >> - Contributing a new version? >> - Uploading\encouraging people to use it? >> >> I'm asking because I was limited on the 32 bit version because of the >> memory limit (only 1 or 2 thread running) so I recompiled a 64 bit version. >> I'm all for sharing, but don't want any trouble. >> >> As I'm testing the result, I'm hitting one problem. My benchmarks are >> running, but here is the preliminary: >> DL version (binary for windows) runs a test in 350 seconds >> Compiled 32 version (in release, fully optimized) runs the same test in >> 895 seconds. >> >> This is baffling me. Anybody has any clue? Does the source actually match >> what was used to build it? (I may have done a dumb mistake, worked on this >> instead of sleeping... but I typically know what I'm doing with code...) >> These results are king of killing the purpose of building a faster >> version... If the original is still 2-3 times faster, tough to beat! >> >> Also, this is more technical, but here we go. >> Panomatic seems to have 2 phases in the same way that Sift does; 1st find >> control points. 2nd, match points between images and purge everything else. >> In Panomatic, the 2nd phase is awfully long, taking over 90% of the >> processing time. It seems that one major difference between sift and surf in >> their classic impementation is that in sift, it is done single thread and in >> one global run, while for surf, it is done per pair of images, multi thread. >> The pair thing is killing me since I typically shoot 51 images per pano. >> >> Now, the question for the experts. Is that second phase the >> same\similar\completely different between autopanoSIFT-c and Panomatic? >> Could the second one be improved with the way the first one was coded? >> >> There you go. Hope this mail is not too long. >> >> 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]<hugin-ptx%[email protected]> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > > > -- > 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]<hugin-ptx%[email protected]> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -- 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
