My configuration: Hugin 2014 RC4 on a Mac OS X 10.9.4.
A new Hugin user, I'm trying to use Hugin itself to mimic a simple approach to creating HDR: 1. Align images at different exposures via *align_image_stack*. (Taken on a tripod, so well aligned at the start.) 2. *enfuse* the resulting images to combine the best exposure for each part of the images. (The approach is described here, among other places: http://photoblog.edu-perez.com/2009/02/hdr-and-linux.html. I've already used the included "Hugintools" to do this via the command line (and in fact have a nice Applescript droplet app that will do it automatically when you drop image files on it). So now I'm trying to do it with Hugin.) Here's the workflow I first thought would work: *Workflow 1* 1. On the *Photos* tab, add images. 2. Use *align_image_stack linear* to create control points. 3. On the *Sticher* tab, set the projection to rectilinear, calculate field of view, calculate optimal size, fit crop to images. 4. Same tab, uncheck everything, but "Exposure fused stacks". (This can be flakey BTW, and I sometimes have to switch back and forth between two tabs to get the checkboxes to work.) 5. *Stitch!* This results in only *nona* and *enfuse* running. Differences from the command-line approach: 1. *nona* runs, whereas that's not in the command-line approach (which works well, btw). 2. The shaped of the content part of the final image is convex on top and bottom. I don't see any cropping, but the shape is wrong. 3. The size is also not exactly the same as the original, as it is in the command-line approach. This despite the fact that the images were taken on a tripod. In particular, the originals are 4608x3456, and the Hugin output 4118x3268, so that's a bit taller proportionately and smaller overall. If I force Hugin to use the original size, it changes the FoV and the output ends up slightly cropped. My question here is why doesn't this produce the same output as the command-line method? They seem to be using the same commands of *align_image_stack* and *enfuse*, but maybe Hugin is doing something else too, or assuming something else? So after some playing I hit upon... *Workflow 2* 1. Add images. 2. Use *align_image_stack linear* to create control points. 3. Go to "preview panorama" window and change the projection to Rectilinear from Equirectangular. This squares out the image. 4. Go to "fast preview panorama" window and auto-crop the image. 5. On the *Sticher* tab, calculate field of view, calculate optimal size, fit crop to images. 6. Same tab, check only "Exposure fused stacks". 7. *Stitch!* Again the size of the image isn't quite the same: 4589x3574, cropped to 3456, so in this case a *little* taller with the same height. The image is clearly mildly cropped on the sides, but looks the same top to bottom. Using the GIMP to subtract the final images from each workflow (CL and Hugin) shows that they are nearly identical where they overlap. More questions: 1. Is there any way not to run *nona*, or is it absolutely necessary? 2. Should I worry about the slight differences in size? I suspect this is leftover from the either the alignment (although it doesn't happen in the CL version), or the projection change. Can I eliminate it? 3. Why doesn't changing the projection in workflow 1 work as it does in workflow 2? Thanks for any help. (PS A general observation that once you're out of simple mode (which I almost never am in), Hugin requires you to jump from one tab to another, or to a preview. I'm not very experienced, but the interface is confusing to me.) -- A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/48a93619-7b47-467d-baa9-6ded752af68e%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
