Yes, Thats true bruno. Any arrangement does a very fine job. It not only fuses but it ALLIGNS as well. enfusing without allignment results in strangely alligned results. But can i have three exposure complete layered equirect for post processing in Photoshop using any arrangment. I once tried and i got several partial layers.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu 22-Sep-2011 at 23:40 -0700, kfj wrote: > >> On 22 Sep., 23:22, Bruno Postle <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> This does mean that small photos that overlap with large photos may get >>> fused even if you would prefer them to be blended. >>> >> > Thanks for your analysis. I now managed to circumvent the problem by >> stitching first the 8mm exposures and then the 18mm ones to finally blend >> the two subpanoramas into one. This is a cumbersome process, though, and it >> would be much easier if the stitching process could honour stacks if they >> are present and only do it's undocumented hardcoded 70% trick when run in >> the 'exposure fusion from stacks from arbitrary arrangement' mode. >> > > The 'any arrangement' mode doesn't assemble stacks, it blends each exposure > level into a separate layer, then fuses them together as a final step - i.e. > it is suitable when you have shot at different exposures, want to exposure > fuse them, but don't necessarily have a series of 'stacks'. > > > The current behaviour is misleading, since a user who has assigned stacks >> will expect that an 'exposure fusion from stacks' will in fact fuse these >> stacks, and not some stacks the program makes up itself. >> > > Hugin will fuse these stacks that have been manually assigned. The problem > is that it gives no indication what it is doing, and then people assume it > is doing something else altogether... > > Actually the automatic detection of overlap for stacks works very well, it > was relatively recently implemented and replaced a much cruder overlap test > (which nobody ever complained about either). > > I think your incredibly corner-case example (shooting bracketed at two > different resolutions) is something that would be better served if Hugin > showed what it planned to do, giving you a chance to do something about it. > Disabling a functionality that works fine for nearly all predicatable > situations wouldn't be a step forward here. > > -- > Bruno > > > -- > 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 > -- *Emaad* www.flickr.com/emaad -- 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
