If you can set your camera to automatically bracket using JPGs, I'd
think you'd get good dynamic range results. Or you can do it manually
(adjusting the shutter speed). Then you're getting into the area of
shooting high-dynamic range images.
On 12/11/2012 09:23 AM, JohnPW wrote:
Actually, for static situations, I have found that taking 3 or 4 jpeg
exposures (maximum quality) and stacking them gives a surprisingly
decent result and (with my camera) is quicker and better than a single
TIFF. My P&S camera takes forever to process a TIFF and they gobble up
card space like crazy. Converting the JPEGS to 16b and stacking allows
produces an image with higher resolution more dynamic range (obviously
nowhere near as good as RAW, but if the camera could shoot RAW, I'd do
that instead.)
John
On Monday, December 10, 2012 10:10:00 PM UTC-6, GnomeNomad wrote:
That's how I've done it. Works quite successfully.
If you're shooting JPGs, I wouldn't worry about converting them to
16-bit TIFF - JPG doesn't have the color depth for that.
Hmm, I think using TIFF isn't onerous at all!
On 12/10/2012 01:04 PM, JohnPW wrote:
> Why not faux-bracket the source images first, then stack and
enfuse them
> before stitching?
> This is similar to making bracketed images from RAW files
(eliminates
> alignment/movement difficulties common to conventional bracketing.)
> I have to admit, most of my panos are from jpegs shot with cheap
point
> and shoots that don't do RAW (and using TIFF is too onerous.)
> John
>
> On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:13:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Witten
wrote:
>
> I've achieved some pleasing results by using `Hugin' to stitch a
> panorama several times with various Exposure Values, and then
passing
> this faux-bracketed stack through `enfuse' to yield the final,
> exposure-fused result; this usually pulls out more details,
especially
> in places like a sky that might otherwise be blown out and
clipped.
>
> Unfortunately for this technique, the choice of seams made by
> `enblend' occasionally depends on the Exposure Value setting;
> consequently, various features in the images of the
faux-bracketed
> stack don't align, and thus the final exposure-fused panorama
exhibits
> ghosting and the like.
>
> Is there a way to keep `enblend' from choosing alternate
seams? Are
> there better ways to achieve this faux-bracketing?
--
Gnome Nomad
[email protected]
wandering the landscape of god
http://www.clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
http://www.cafepress.com/otherend/
--
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
