On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:50:20 PM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote:
> Okay, I just did that test. I have a different explanation -- the output > results from the optimization report errors relative to the output > horizontal field of view. I took a pto file, ran the optimization (but > did not save the results). The max error was 3.023, then I made a copy of > the pto file, and multiplied the output horz fov by 3, and the optimization > max error becomes 9.069 -- exactly different by the factor of 3. So the > optimization itself got to the same result, it's just the scale of reported > result changed because of the value of the output horz fov. > > Thanks for doing that test. That seems to be most of my answer: The initial report of the error in my example was so unrealistically low because in the normal work flow you compute the alignment before knowing the correct output field of view, so it gets reported based on a default field of view. But, in my comparison, the optimization result also changed, not just the scaling of the report of the result. So I expect the other Stitcher parameters also impact the Optimizer. -- 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/5b7a45c5-3e0f-47ce-bc0b-f8f0ee7fc3a0n%40googlegroups.com.
