Hello Yuv
This is no issue of Hugin itself, but it is a lack of Standard in handling and using EXIF info by camera manufacturers and software developers. > > It seems there is no standard in the EXIF info of various camera > > manufacturers, and handling and saving of the EXIF info after the > > development and processing by the developers of the programs. > > a couple of years ago I fixed the FOV reading for Olympus cameras. Out of > camera images are pretty OK now, but there is no way Hugin can support the > panoply of software used to convert RAW / edit the images before they are fed > into Hugin. > > > Focal length in generaly is handled well (except canon zoom browser > > that works only well for EXIF info for canon camera files). > > I am not sure I understand this statement. Is there an issue with files saved > from canon zoom browser when they are loaded into Hugin? Yes there is an issue with olympus jpegs processed in the Canon zoom browser. When checking the EXIF after processing the focal length isn't in it. > > Apart of the save lens, wish there was a camera database in Hugin > > where you can put the camera and multiplier for that camera and save > > it. > > When needed Hugin can read that info and fill in the multiplier > > value.The multiplier is only dependent of the camera and not the lens. > > The multiplier depends on what is in the file. As much as converting software > can garble EXIF, it is possible that a converting software garbles the > multipler as well, e.g. "converts" the focal length information to full frame > equivalent or whatever multiplier it wants to write in. > > I don't think that recalling a multiplier value based on the camera's > identification tag can be helpful. Building in a camera database with the multiplier in Hugin with all camera's is too painfull and always not up to date. Too many camera's coming out each year for it. I've a license and use PTAssembler too. In the beginning Max Lyons started a database for camera model and multiplying value, but abandoned that, because it is too time consumingto keep it up to date. That is a simple text file according a certain syntax with manufacturer and model and multiplier. Manufacturer and model according the EXIF info. I can edit my camera's in it according the EXIF info and put the multiplier in it. The multiplying value is then hardcoded in the program and has not to be calculated from the EXIF info. Luckily it is a text file, so PTAssembler can read now my camera and multiplier from the text file. Manufacturer and model stays intact in the EXIF by postprocessed jpegs and developed raw files. When the camera is not in the multiplier list then PTAssembler tries to calculate it from the EXIF info. Out of curiosity I found this by studying the multiplier file and the exif info, so I could feed my camera's in the multiplier file. Perhaps in the future a possibility that the user feeds his own camera and multiplying value for them in Hugin? > Also, most users work with a single camera and a single conversion software. > Sometimes two. The effort of saving the lens (which is anyway strongly > recommended, including calibration) is minimal. Getting to grip with the > hundreds of camera models, EXIF-mangling software, and all combinations > thereof is not practical. I just did this test out of curiosity, because I didn't get the multiplying factor of my in Elements processed E-500 files. I'm as most users, but curiosity strikes me some time. The camera's I use are only the E-500 and powershot A590. Software I use for viewing and processing is Photoshop elements 7 and Faststone image viewer. Kind regards, Henk -- 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
