Pit, are we talking about the lens distortion and rectilinear projection peculiarities ? I was hoping that Hugin's ( Fulla & Nona ) lens modelling would be sufficient to 'remove' these obstacles prior to / during deconvolution ?
:-J On Mar 20, 4:24 pm, Pit Suetterlin <[email protected]> wrote: > Erik Krause wrote: > > So it boils down to extract a proper point spread function from > > comparing sharp and blurred version and feed it to the Fourier > > filter. At least this is my very limited understanding... > > Yes, that's (sort of) what we do in astronomical image processing. But there, > FOV is normally small, and the PSF is constant within the FOV. This clearly > will not be the case in a wide-field image, leave alone optical distortions by > the lens. So I'd say the problem is less determining the PSF, but rather > putting that into a model that is valid for the whole FOV.... > > Pit > > -- > Dr. Peter "Pit" Suetterlin http://www.astro.su.se/~pit > Institute for Solar Physics > Tel.: +34 922 405 590 (Spain) [email protected] > +46 8 5537 8507 (Sweden) [email protected] -- 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
