On 14 Sep., 20:47, Rosomack <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kay, > > this sure sounds like a bug. > > On 13 Wrz, 21:34, kfj <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I can try and reduce the problem to a simple test case, > > compress the images and file a bug report. > > That would be much appreciated! The algorithm is new, so we have to > iron out the bugs that didn't appear in early tests.
this bug seems to be tricky. I tried to replace the images with dummies by running ptodummy on the pto, but this kept the bug from happening. I finally managed to boil it down to two images, and I noticed the first one had a part masked out. When I removed the mask, the bug would not occur. I've placed the two images in my Ubuntu One account: http://ubuntuone.com/5agaYGJD7U8c28IjaXTuTd http://ubuntuone.com/5wacFTG5X4xbAEIT9Ev34z Here I can produce the erroneous output by simply doing enblend -o xx.tif enb*.tif What happens is that the masked part comes out black and most of the second image is missing. Still want me to file a bug report with the tracker? > As for the "slow" part, please make sure that you are building without > debug symbols. From my experience it had a significant impact on > performance. The algorithm _is_ slower, but it shouldn't be too bad > even for big pictures. Ooops... thanks for pointing it out. I had just taken the whole cmake command line from the wiki, and there it's with Debug. The speed seems more reasonable now I've recompiled with Release. 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
