On 11 Okt., 22:21, Bernd Hohmann <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > is there any switch to force autopano-sift-c to create a buch broader > distriubution of the control points?
Probably not, but why use autopano-sift-c? I reckon I am using the same lens as you (mine is called Walimex pro fisheye, but I think it's the same as your Samyang) - and I do 6 around, 1 up 1 down and get good results using Panomatic and/or Jenny's autopano. Often I combine the two, and the process is still much faster than using autopano-sift-c. If you're on Windows, you can just download the precompiled binaries from the relevant websites, if you're on Linux, Panomatic sources compile with next to no effort (have tried it), but you can't get autopano 103 sources. What system are you on? And, even if your CPs are concentrated in specific areas, if you use the right lens parameters, this should not be a problem [you only absolutely need an even distribution and many CPs when you calibrate the lens]. You can calculate the lens parameters by creating a panorama with many (like, 20) well-overlapping shots done with a pano head, best indoors with lots of detail all around you (like, a structured ceiling, not just wallpaper), and optimize for a,b,c,d and e. This is done more quickly if you do not use full-size images but scale them down to some 3 MP apiece. Don't forget to set the lens type to stereographic (you need a recent hugin version for that), and there you go [with earlier hugin versions, you can work with the full-frame fisheye setting, but the Samyang really is stereographic!]. For your actual panoramas you use that same lens ini file, never mind what image size you have then, the important thing is a,b, and c; the d and e you optimize again with your panorama since they vary every time. In my experience, it's not a good idea to optimze for a,b and c again; better to just use the lens ini from the accurate measurement. The lens ini will shape your images just right, and then you don't need that many CPs to get the panorama right, even only three per pair should be enough. With my Walimex I got v=98.2757 a=0.0153614 b=-0.0595849 c=0.00447485 (that's in portrait orientation, with lens type 'stereographic', and using hugin 2010.2.0 - there's a bug with earlier versions of hugin which calculates the hfov wrong with stereographic lenses) You might try that as a starting point, maybe our lenses aren't too different. Do check panomatic out - if you only have 10 images a pano it's well fast enough, even though it compares every pair - which, on the other hand, is quite a good method to get the zenith and nadir right. And Jenny's autopano is even faster, and usually spits out a fair number of CPs, and if you have a few misses, just do the statistical cleanup. with regards KFJ -- 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
