On Aug 4, 2024, at 5:00 AM, Frédéric Da Vitoria <[email protected]>
wrote:
I tried it too. I did everything manually, I never use the assistant.
Here is how I proceeded:
1. I let Hugin Create control points
2. I optimized using following steps (checking at each step that
standard deviation was improving):
1. Positions (incremental, starting from anchor)
2. Positions and translation
3. Positions, translation and view
4. Positions, translation and barrel
5. Positions, translation, view and barrel
3. I previewed the results: things were completely off.
4. I deleted a few control points which were obviously on
reflections, as well as control points which could not work (for
example a control point on the sea horizon or on moving objects
such as cars, beware of boats, some moored boats are actually
moving slightly)
5. I added a few vertical lines and a few horizontal lines
6. I reset all images and ran point 3 again: better, but some
buildings were still skewed and some image borders did not match
enough to my taste
7. I added control points on faraway points (characteristic points
on the mountains, faraway buildings...) and removed "duplicated"
control points (control points placed by Hugin which were so
close together that I couldn't see both numbers at the same time)
8. I reset all and ran point 3 again: definitely better
9. I removed all automatically generated control points which were
between 2 other close control points. I deliberately removed more
aggressively control points close (to the camera) than remote
control points, trying to give more weight to the far image. The
reasoning here is that parallax errors will be very frequent
because the camera was moved a lot; because of this, matching
both close objects and distant objects at the same time is
impossible, I choose first if I prefer my images to match in
close objects or in distant objects. Because of your use case, I
decided that matching the horizon was preferable.
10. I reset all and ran point 3 again: what I saw seemed good, except
that at some point I stopped seing the seaward part (and I did
not notice it was missing). Actually, images 4, 5 & 6 are there,
but they are seen from the side. I attach this version as 0_1 -
330_1 - v1.pto
11. In an attempt to fix things, I tried to add vertical and
horizontal lines in images where they were missing and to add
control points between images 8 & 9, but results were close to
the previous one.
12. So I decided to change strategy: I removed all control points on
buildings, keeping only control points on the ground.
13. Because I had eliminated the buildings from the problem, I
reasoned that translation was maybe not a useful parameter and I
optimized using following steps (checking at each step that
standard deviation was improving):
1. Positions (incremental, starting from anchor)
2. Positions and view
3. Positions, translation and view
4. Positions and barrel distorsion (standard deviation was worse
here so that I did not apply this step)
5. Positions, view and barrel
6. Everything without distorsion. I repeated this last step
until standard deviation stopped improving.
14. The result seems pretty good IMO (0_1 - 330_1 - v2.pto)
Here is what I would do now: I would have generated the panorama
using the option "Normal panorama with layered TIFF output", loaded
the result in Gimp or a similar tool and worked with layers and masks
in order to keep from each image the best ground level and get
straight-looking buildings.
I suggest taking intermediate photos:
- between 5 & 6 (not enough overlap),
- and between 6 & 7, and 7 & 8 to try to create more control points
there (because it is impossible to put control points close to the
horizon on those).
Also, maybe taking more than one picture from each place (like you
did with 0 & 1 and 3 & 4) would improve the end result. At least it
would give you more options in the final Gimp step.
I hope I was clear enough in my explanations.
Le 02/08/2024 à 09:10, Sam Rhoads a écrit :
Thanks again David. I will open that PTO file tomorrow and let you
know whether or not I would like you to send me that 189 MB file.
Of possible interest to everyone, I got a MacBook Pro today and will
try using Hugin and my images with it, and tell everyone later what
happens.
Had sushi for dinner.
Sam.
On Aug 1, 2024, at 8:10 PM, David W. Jones <[email protected]>
wrote:
On that panorama, I selected the images in my file manager and ran
Hugin's Generate PTO tool. I use Linux, I don't know if Windows has
that capability.
Then I went to the panorama preview, clicked on the Assistant
button, then clicked on the align button, and got a 360-deg panorama.
I think if you open the PTO in Hugin, you should get the same pano.
Hugin may tell you that alignment or control points have changed,
or something like that, but I think that's something you can ignore.
I think I added some points manually, because there were a couple
of image pairs that didn't have any control points.
Adding horizontal lines to the images that have horizons, then
running Align again, should level the images in the panorama. I
didn't try that in the PTO file I sent. It improved things quite a
bit in my first try at the panorama, but that one only gave me a
180-deg panorama.
I have a TIFF image of it, if you're interested. It comes to
2274x3494 (not cropped), 189MB. On the left end is one image, then
a black area that shades into the next image. I have no idea what
caused that.
Enjoy your dinner!
On 8/1/24 18:48, Sam Rhoads wrote:
Thanks David. When my panorama was in that shape, I spent a lot
of time with Photoshop “fixing” things. But my real question is
whether this one will be “sharper” than the one I produced. Do
you think if I open that pto file in Hugin I’ll get the same
panorama? I’ll try that in a while. Did you create a tiff image?
Right now I have to go buy dinner.
Did you let Hugin find control points? Did you add any manually?
More questions later.
Sam.
On Aug 1, 2024, at 6:37 PM, David W. Jones <[email protected]>
wrote:
I didn't use any horizontal lines in this one. They would have
helped fix the wavy horizon.
Attaching a screen shot and the PTO file that produced it.
Neither of them came out as straight as the original one you
produced.
On 8/1/24 18:27, Samuel Rhoads wrote:
Great David. Please attach it. I'd like to see it.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 6:14 PM David W. Jones
<[email protected]> wrote:
No problem.
I've never made a 360-deg pano. I don't know how to make one
at all. So I might simply not be doing it right in the first
place. But the second time I tried, I got a 360-deg panorama
from it.
On 8/1/24 17:39, Samuel Rhoads wrote:
I screwed up. I was pretty sure I had only included the
*_1 files, but I see that I did include two _3 files by
mistake. Sorry 'bout that!
But the 12 _1 files: 0_1, 30_1, 60_1 ..., should make a 360
degree pan.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:23 PM David W. Jones
<[email protected]> wrote:
Yes, I used your zip file, the one in the link below.
It doesn't have 12 images in it, it has 14.
These two images don't have any mountains or ocean in
them: 120_3.jpg and 210_3.jpg. The 210_3 image has a
part of the same beach that's already covered in the
210_1 image.
I think the *_3 images aren't needed, and apparently
you removed them from some other zip file you uploaded
to Google Drive?
I've never made a 360-deg panorama, so I got a
180-degree partial one.
On 8/1/24 13:41, Sam Rhoads wrote:
David: That’s confusing. The 12 images: 0_1 through
330_1, all have either the ocean or mountains on the
horizon. Did you use the zip file that had all 12
images? If some of those 12 images were removed, the
panorama wouldn’t have been complete?
Sam.
On Aug 1, 2024, at 11:48 AM, Gnome Nomad
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:
When I tried the Hugin Assistant, it found control
points on all of them. I don't know anything about
using Translation. I did eventually get sort-of
straight horizon but only after removing two images
that were mostly building foundations that had no
horizon as part of them.
--
David W. Jones
[email protected]
exploring the landscape of god
http://dancingtreefrog.com
Sent from my Android device.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024, 11:30 Samuel Rhoads
<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks Carl. Any idea why the optimizer tab only
shows up then? I spent hours trying to get the
optimizer tab to appear There are so many things
that I just do not understand. I don’t understand
how people learn all these options.
Sam
On Aug 1, 2024, at 11:25 AM, Carl Ovenschotel
<[email protected]> wrote:
Indeed it couldn't find points for those images.
The Optimizer tab pops up when you have Optimize
\ Geometric \ Custom Parameters selected.
On Thursday, August 1, 2024 at 2:38:37 AM UTC+2
[email protected] wrote:
Carl: Can you tell me a little about your
experience? Did Hugin tell you that it
couldn’t find any CPs for 120_1 & 150_1?
Did the Optimizer tab appear? Did the
stitcher report that some images didn’t
belong to the set?
Sam.
On Jul 31, 2024, at 12:31 PM, Carl
Ovenschotel <[email protected]> wrote:
I tried to make a panorama of your photos
but I failed. After years of using Hugin I
still don't know what I'm doing. Maybe
someone else can give it a go.
On Wednesday, July 31, 2024 at 8:45:30 PM
UTC+2 [email protected] wrote:
To be clear, I am hoping that someone
in the community will take the 12
images in this zip file and try to
create a panorama using Hugin. When I
do that, I get strange error messages
that I do not understand. The resulting
panorama won’t be satisfactory for
SkySafari, but at least I’ll find out
what’s causing the errors.
Sam.
On Jul 30, 2024, at 4:16 PM, Samuel
Rhoads <[email protected]> wrote:
Trying once again! Forgive an old
stupid man, please.
0_1 - 330_1 (2).zip
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rx8y_NfMlTnpst-ZdxGfUUkP9kPs2s9B/view?usp=drive_web>
