Darko Makreshanski wrote:
James Legg wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 00:57 +0100, Darko Makreshanski wrote:
Yes, the equirectangular would be most suitable to convert to a 3D
mesh.
Basically I was thinking of projecting all of the images separately,
each with its center as the center of projection. Then to convert
each projection into a 3D mesh, and finally join the meshes based on
the yaw, pitch, roll parameters. This would be to avoid any problems
with the poles, however I am not sure if it would be necessary.
Have you thought about how the z-order of the images would work in the
outside sphere view?
The overlapping images in Hugin eventually get merged with enblend. In
the previews they are just drawn over the top of each other for speed.
In a 3D sphere, the images will still overlap. If you continue to draw
them over the top of each other, bits of the images on the back half of
the sphere may be drawn over the front of the sphere.
I don't think you could use OpenGL's depth buffer and depth test
directly, because the overlapping images would z-fight.
-James
Yes, this is very tricky.
I was so far assuming to use the depth buffer because it is most
appropriate for 3D scenes.
In this case if we don't use the depth buffer, then we will have to
some how avoid drawing the back of the faces.
But in this case the problem is also that if we use the thing that I
explained about shifting the spheres for the translation, then the
scene becomes a mess.
For example some image may have a combination of translation and
position such that it will displayed inside or outside the central
sphere. In some cases images might cross each other.
As for the depth buffer, the problem with the z-fight I believe can
not be solved, because of the existence of translations. If we have
projections on spheres with different centers, then z-fight is
inevitable, and the only thing we can do is fiddle with the resolution
of the meshes.
Since my model was wrong and there is no need to draw multiple spheres,
the problem is now simplified.
Also, as I understood now how the Tr parameters affect the result, I
believe there should be two modes for the overview: A normal one just
showing the spherical model, and a linear mode where instead of just the
sphere, the plane would be rendered as well.
The linear mode would also change some stuff in the projection canvas as
well. For example, limit hfov to 180, disable yaw, pitch adjustments,
and enable translation adjustments.
Darko
--
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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or
reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
