On 17 Feb., 19:57, Bill Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Has anyone successfully created a workflow that adds control points > based on geometry rather than feature matches? > > If one were to somehow calculate these control points, how best to > get them into the system, and then not have them altered by the > optimizer stage, etc.? Hi Bill! What you need for your images is correct yaw, pitch and roll values - control points are only a means to get them. As Bruno has pointed out, these values might be derived from the capture process, be it from it's parameters as passed to the robotic head, be it as a log file of sorts. If the 'featureless' images are placed (roughly) by using the capture process y, p and r values, and if they're not connected by control points with other images, they'll be left where they are by the optimizer. Putting the y, p and r values into the pto script, which is a mere text file, isn't difficult. On the other hand, where you have images with features, you can do the last bit of nudging via CPs and the optimizer. In corner cases, when you have only little usable content somewhere in an image, you need to manually intervene if the stitch isn't perfect. Another method to deal with featureless areas is to have some more wide-angle material to use as backdrop, in which case you can omit those images that don't yield (usable) CPs. Setting CPs following the shooting pattern is not a good idea, because CPs should reflect matching content, as determined by the feature detector in the CP generator - or your eyes, if you set them manually. Kay -- 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
