For someone who prides himself on his intelligence, and his spacial awareness, I can be a complete idiot sometimes. Apart from the errors in the matching, I was trying to get a rectilinear image off of a spherical projection, but my camera was offset by about 10% of the image (I was lying in the road behind bollards with traffic running a metre away from my head and could not move further across). It is not possible to correct for the field of view that I want since the normal from me to the plane will hit off centre. When I resize the field of view to include more of the sphere outside of what I want then it gets closer. It is a shame that the controls for yaw etc have to be types in and cannot be controlled by up and down arrows but I am getting there. Many thanks
On Monday, 12 July 2021 at 08:30:37 UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > This should be possible as long as the surface you are surveying is flat. > > The only output projection that will display straight lines in the 3d > scene as straight lines in the 2d stitched output is 'rectilinear'. > > Are all the photos taken from the same position? In which case this is a > 'normal' panorama, though you will need to set horizontal and vertical > control points to remove any remaining perspective 'keystone' distortion. > > If the photos are each taken from different positions, then this needs to > be stitched as a 'mosaic'. The technique depends on the photos, but usually > trying to optimise all parameters in one go doesn't work so well. So you > may need to optimise x, y & z positions first, then bring in r, p & y > rotations, and finally add the lens parameters. > > -- > Bruno > > > On 11 July 2021 17:56:25 BST, adrian pope wrote: > >I have taken a number of photos looking up at the underside of a bridge > to > >try to produce a rectangular image of the cracks. 10m by 8m photographed > >from 4m below. > >I loaded all the image into a tiny free program, with no controls, and it > >produced an almost perfect stitch, with perfect vertical lines (it is a > > > >series of parallel beams) but with major barreling top and bottom. The > >photos appear to be suitable for stitching. > >I have tried for 20 hours now to use Hugin to get a better result but I > am > >missing something major. I have 50% overlaps, with 30+ control points > >between each but have gotten nowhere. Even when I tell it that there are > >verticals, and add in verticals for the full height of a photo, it still > >bends the output and has poor registration between images. > >I finally used Xara (like coreldraw) to individually perspective correct > >each of three images (as a trial) so that the "Vertical" joints were > >vertical, and the "Horizontal" shutter marks (also with control points > >assigned) were horizontal but it seemed distorted the images badly and > > > >gave an awful colour output. > >I have tried using mosaic as well as photosphere and every projection I > can > >find but all to no avail. > >Should Hugin be able to do what I want or am I wasting my time > >Many thanks > -- 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/82ead39d-9b07-4102-98f8-4b449fad4fcfn%40googlegroups.com.
