Hi Emaad, On December 27, 2010 04:24:02 am Emad ud din Btt wrote: > Yuv, I have reported CPfind experience in my last email. > > "I have tried CPfind. It worked great for two projects. It added CPs for > 217 images in 1008 seconds. I used default 10 cp settings. It even added > its max 50 cps per image to these 217 images in very short time. But I > dont know why its not working like that now for even smaller number of > images. It goes on iterating again and again. Than keep displaying > strategies and than back to iteration process. My previous experience with > autopano sift c is somewhat same. It also keeps iterating even if you > leave it for 24 hours. I have tested
it is impossible to help you / come to a conclusion from what you describe above. If I understand correctly: cpfind and autopano-sift-c work for the same large set of images and don't work for a smaller set of images? can you make the smaller set of images available? if two cp generators fail the same images set, an issue with the input images should be considered/tested. you could try other CP generators on the same, failing set of images. also: did you try cpfind and autopano-sift-c from the command line? just to exclude an unrelated GUI freeze/problem, I'd run the tests from the command line. > Can anyone, explain how CPfind works. http://wiki.panotools.org/Cpfind > Please! Read my email and help me. It's a two way street. Can't help you without your help. > My second question is....Control point generation is most important part of > panorama creation. So Why we cant work or discuss over it? Is CP generation really the most important part of panorama creation? I don't think so. Image alignment is certainly crucial, but there are other ways to align images than by generating CPs (manual or generated) and optimizing CPs. > When we talk about PTgui, Autopano or other commercial softwares, we assume > its a full package and CP generation is part of it.I am not into > comparisons here but you will admit CP generation is essential part of > Panorama creation softwares. Panorama creation is a _workflow_ not a _software_. There is more than one workflow to create panoramas, and while CP generation is 'essential' to _your_ workflow, it was not to the workflow underlying the creation of [0]; and it is certainly not essential part of any software. It is wrong to assume that CP generation _must_ be part of any software just because there are software that you deem to be 'full packages'. What is the definition of 'full package' anyway? Following your logic, you will admit that blending is 'essential part of Panorama reation softwares'. And yet Enblend is not part of Hugin. Those are two separate distinct packages. Hugin must redistribute Enblend with the Windows installer to palliate a major design fault in the Windows operating system: it does not have a package manager. In systems with package manager, all Hugin has to do is 'tell' the package manager that it needs Enblend. Applying the same logic to the CP generation, it would make sense for the Hugin Windows installer to distribute a CP generator because it can't simply 'tell' the package manager that it needs one. Unfortunately the (re)distribution of most CP generators is encumbered by patents. Blame it on the patent holders and on the legal system in which we operate (SourceForge is located in the United States). Even if one or many software packages do cover what you think is essential to your workflow, it is wrong to expect any other software package to do the same. Your workflow is your responsibility, not the responsibility of the software package or its authors. The performance and bugs of third-party tools is not the responsibility of those developing, building, packaging or distributing Hugin. Feel free to discuss them, but don't expect them to be part of Hugin, nor for Hugin developers to take responsibility for them. Yuv [0] <http://www.seamlesscity.com/purchase.html>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
