> This is a bug, I will fix it.

Cool, thank you!

> calculation of the correlation is expensive

I assumed the correlation was also calculated when you detect CPs. That said I 
didn't necessarily mean to show it at all times. Just when you press Fine-tune 
all would be enough, but still in a separate column.

> Cpfind searches in different levels, correlation is only calculating in 100 % 
> scale.

Do you mean if you stitch photos with different resolutions, CPfind with find 
good CPs but the correlation calculation will give low values? Or does it also 
have implications on photos with the same resolution?

To explain why I imagine correlation next to distance being useful:
I assemble natural landscape panoramas which have to be stitched as precisely 
as possible.
Sometimes the wind moves leaves in a turbulent way and trees 200 meters from 
the camera may look slightly different between 2 photos.
On the other hand, if there's a stone 3 meters from the camera, the correlation 
and number of CPs is going to be higher on it because the wind doesn't affect 
it. Problem is: if the tripod is not properly calibrated to avoid parallax (I'm 
not always the one taking the photos), the far away trees may be more reliable 
even though they have low correlation, but Hugin may prefer the stone because 
there are more CPs on it. This means the optimizer will give a higher CP 
distance on the trees which will introduce a seam in the far away landscape.
"You should delete the CPs on the stone" I hear you say. The thing is I don't 
always know if there is parallax and sometimes, close elements take up such a 
large part of the photo that I'd prefer not to have CPs covering a small area, 
so I leave the ones on the stone in the hopes that there's no parallax.

And here's the point:
If I could see that the CPs with low correlation have a high distance, this 
would draw my attention and I may find that these CPs are in the far away trees 
and then I would know not to trust that stone and delete those CPs with more 
confidence.

Do you think there's a better approach?

-- 
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/3FKQMg_KI_LRINJdbFeBNWxiSxM9A4Fkm9gcUIK3c5MVGQ_EHW9JINB-gXTQazjlrYSkVPRq1qb60-BeFTnvjT200yo50FkgtSzejAU7Kvc%3D%40protonmail.com.
  • [hugin-ptx] ... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
    • [hugin-... T. Modes
    • [hugin-... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
      • [hu... T. Modes
        • ... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
          • ... T. Modes
            • ... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
          • ... Klaus Foehl
            • ... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
              • ... 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free panoramic software
            • ... dgjohnston
              • ... Greg 'groggy' Lehey
              • ... Klaus Foehl
                • ... Donald Johnston

Reply via email to