On May 18, 6:20 am, Tom Glastonbury <[email protected]> wrote: > Note that enblend/enfuse version 4.0 is what you'll get from my Windows > 64-bit hugin builds. As you rightly say, it's not the 64-bit version - > I'll work on that. As for your question - from reading some comments > elsewhere, it looks like enblend/enfuse use some hand-crafted SSE code, > and will use the 64-bit versions for 64-bit builds (note this is a > somewhat speculative comment). I'd imagine that this could make a > meaningful difference to performance. Anyhow, I'll get the 64-bit > version going shortly then you can compare them side-by-side. > I'm not even that worried about potential performance hits between 32/64-bit .. What concerns me more is that rendering even modestly- sized panos [16k*8k equirectangular] from more than a few images [37 or 38 in my case] with --fine-mask turned on [as mentioned above] causes enblend to exit with out of memory errors [only after doing most of the job, frustratingly] apparently regardless of the amount of actual RAM or swap available.. on Windows, at least. Some digging through the Mac Hugin fora uncovers the same issue which can apparently be fixed on that platform by using the openmp version[s] of enblend. On Windows, this is not the case, unfortunately [at least, not with the openmp version of enblend 3.2 which exits with the same error].
Your work is very much appreciated, Tom, as is Yuval's. -- 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
