On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 14:18 -0700, Mateusz wrote: > I think, that it should not use entire memory 12Gb at once. > The algorithm should be aware that there are machine limitations and > should not allocate all possible memory even if the size of canvas is > absurdity. > For me the correct behaviour would be allocating less memory and > freeing it when done, doing things at steps.
This would help with large stitches, but I don't think all large stitches are intentional. For instance if I take a 360 degree equirectangular panorama then just change the projection to stereographic, Hugin sets the horizontal field of view to 359 degrees. Stereographic projection cannot contain 360 degrees, but I wouldn't want it to crop my image unexpectedly. Pressing "Create panorama" on the assistant tab now would try to make an image likely to be hundreds of gigapixels, where only the very middle has enough image data. But I wouldn't want Hugin to lose precession unexpectedly either. If I notice that it looks bad in the preview, and understand why, I might lower the field of view to contain only the bits I want. However, it could look reasonable in the preview and still make images over a gigapixel in size, where only the very middle has enough data. These size images are difficult to store, display, and print too. > Also if this is not > possible, then at least there should be a confirmation dialog, "Do You > really want to do that ... or You wanted this..." and then choose. > Anyway much better solution would be fixing algorithm then interface > if possible. I added a warning for very large panoramas. I think fixing the interface includes making users aware of the practical limits of the projections, which is important to this issue. > > On Oct 10, 10:37 pm, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is a bug (because Hugin should stop you from doing this), but > > also the correct behaviour for what you are asking Hugin to do. > > > > The Assistant resets the pixel dimensions of the canvas to best fit > > the data. In particular it ensures that the canvas is big enough to > > represent all the detail without any part being downscaled. > > > > A 350° wide stereographic panorama probably really does need to be > > rendered with hundreds of gigapixels, otherwise the middle section > > has much less detail than the original photos - You really don't > > intend to lose information do you? -James -- 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
