Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[Sukima]

On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 5:15:15 PM UTC-4, markku...@iki.fi wrote:
>
> One more thing: the focusing scale on Samyang 8mm lenses is often 
> (usually?) incorrectly calibrated so you can't just set it to 1m or 
> infinity and trust that it's actually focused at that distance.


This would explain why the panos I do indoors 
 look good while many of 
my outdoor ones are blurry. And here I thought it was the stitching process 
and/or abrasion since the lens and the camera did *not* cost a small 
fortune. I'm going to try the calibration tonight and see if that was the 
culprit. Thank you!

-- 
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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/8c1fd7e1-a270-42e7-be04-4f1606934e5d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[Markku Kolkka]

20.4.2016, 19:53, panostar kirjoitti:
> On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 4:58:40 PM UTC+1, Donald Johnston wrote:
>>
>> My first recommendation would be for you to find out the hyperfocal focus 
>> distance for your aperture, lens, and camera combination; then use that to 
>> set your focus rather then infinity. For example your XS with an 8mm lens 
>> at f16 would use a focus distance of 8 meters.
>>
> 
> I don't think that can be optimum.  People commonly set the focus at 1m for 
> an 8mm lens.  F/16 won't necessarily give the sharpest images either, as 
> smaller apertures suffer from diffraction effects.  Its best to do some 
> careful tests to establish the best focus distance and aperture 
> combination.

One more thing: the focusing scale on Samyang 8mm lenses is often
(usually?) incorrectly calibrated so you can't just set it to 1m or
infinity and trust that it's actually focused at that distance. You need
to focus each shot using liveview or calibrate the distance scale
yourself. You can find the instructions for calibration here:
https://hdrtist.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/rokinon-8mm-fisheye-lens-review/


-- 
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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/49aed302-0b66-d55e-270e-168604cb83bc%40iki.fi.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[Stefan Peter]

Hi Sukima,

On 20.04.2016 15:44, Sukima wrote:

> I used RawTherapee  to pre-process
> the Raw files I downloaded from the camera. Since the auto settings
> seemed pretty good I kept them except I set the white balance to
> *Shade*. I batch saved all the images to *16 bit TIFF*s (Uncompressed).

If you do full sphere panos, make sure to disable lens corrections and
vignetting correction. Hugin will do a much better job for your specific
lens/camera.

> the images including the hand held nadir. I used the *Full Frame
> Fisheye* with the Focal Length of '8' which in the past seemed like it

The Samyang 8mm lens is a stereographic projection lens, see
http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.html
for more information. And, according to my experience, the projection
selection influences the control point detection, so just changing the
projection in a existing pto won't help.

Make sure you set the "focal length multiplier" correctly four your
camera, that should be around 1.6 for the 1000D.

> around the tripod in all three nadir shots. Finally I click optimize and
> then open the /GL Previw/ window.

What exactly did you optimize for? In expert mode, you can choose
between several optimization levels. I normally start with "Positions
(Incremental from anchor)" and work my way down to "Everything without
translation". And then I "Show control points" icon in the top bar, sort
the control points by distance and inspect all the points with a
distance >10. Or, if I'm lacy (so most of the time) I use the "select by
Distance" button, select everything above let's say 10, and then delete
them. Then I redo the last optimization, and do some more pruning of
control points. Rinse and repeat to your liking, but be aware that you
may end up with unconnected images if you overdo this, but practise
makes perfect ;)

Another option would be the "Actions->Control Points->keep 5 CPs per
image pair" menu entry. But this uses the Phyton plugin interface and I
don't know if this has been packaged in the 2014 Mac version you use.


> And everything looked great. I then
> opened the stitcher view and selected a width of *1024* so the rendering
> would be super fast while I previewed. I found that the GL Preview
> glossed over some artifacts that you don't notice till the final renders.

You can not really trust the preview if you are aiming for quality: If
it would be possible to assemble a quality panorama in realtime, we
would not need the PTBatcher. On the other hand, if your preview just
shows a crazy tangle of lines, the final image will not be any better.

And if you want a high quality, sharp image, don't limit the output to
1024 pixels. In my setup the final image width is around 6000 pixels and
by condensing this to 1024 pixels by combining roughly 6 pixels to one,
you definitely will loose sharpness. If I need a smaller image, I
normally use the panotools-scipt erect2cubic script from
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Panotools-Script/
resize and sharpen thcubic images in gimp and then reassemble them with
cubic2erect.

The setting of File->Preferences->Programs->Nona->Default
interpolator(i) may play a role in this, too. But I'm not versed well
enough to give a recommendation here.

> 
> I noticed that the hand held nadir shot (although almost aligned) had
> parallax issues. Mainly since the nadir was a set of wood boards. So I

Most probably your hand held shot was not from the exactly same point as
the ones from the tripod. In this case, you would need to apply a second
lens to your nadir shot and optimize this image for xyz. But I have
never been able to pull this off successfully, so your mileage may vary.


I hope this gives you some starting points.


With kind regards

Stefan Peter


-- 
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style for details)

-- 
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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/5717C179.4060908%40swissonline.ch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[Donald Johnston]

Thanks John. Sorry, I read the wrong figure for the hyperfocal distance. With 
the numbers quoted it is 0.233m (8m seemed high but it didn’t click in my brain 
properly). At f/11 it moves to 0.326m.

The point being that infinity certainly isn’t the right number!  And you’re 
more likely to run into diffraction problems at f/22 then f/16. If you want to 
set the focus at 1m you can use an aperture setting as low as f/3.5 and still 
have good focus from 0.5m out to infinity (according to the calculators anyway; 
try out various settings yourself and see what sharpness you get with far away 
objects).

> On Apr 20, 2016, at 10:53 AM, panostar  wrote:
> 
> On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 4:58:40 PM UTC+1, Donald Johnston wrote:
> My first recommendation would be for you to find out the hyperfocal focus 
> distance for your aperture, lens, and camera combination; then use that to 
> set your focus rather then infinity. For example your XS with an 8mm lens at 
> f16 would use a focus distance of 8 meters.
> 
> I don't think that can be optimum.  People commonly set the focus at 1m for 
> an 8mm lens.  F/16 won't necessarily give the sharpest images either, as 
> smaller apertures suffer from diffraction effects.  Its best to do some 
> careful tests to establish the best focus distance and aperture combination.  
> I had the Falcon version of this lens and found f/11 worked best for me.
> 
> The setup of the panorama head is good, but more care needs to be taken with 
> the handheld nadir shot to make sure it captures a large enough area.  Here, 
> the tips of two two feet leave holes at the nadir that have to be patched.  I 
> did a stitch with PTGui using viewpoint correction for the nadir, but Hugin 
> has a similar feature that can be used (see 
> http://wiki.panotools.org/Image_positioning_model ).  FWIW, my stitch is 
> uploaded to https://www.sendspace.com/file/gajmwr .
> 
> John
>  
> 
> -- 
> 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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/03619f1b-e72c-4579-839a-2b95e16e6b92%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/85744BA3-1CC7-4526-ABC1-B751932FA24D%40accesscomm.ca.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[panostar]

On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 4:58:40 PM UTC+1, Donald Johnston wrote:
>
> My first recommendation would be for you to find out the hyperfocal focus 
> distance for your aperture, lens, and camera combination; then use that to 
> set your focus rather then infinity. For example your XS with an 8mm lens 
> at f16 would use a focus distance of 8 meters.
>

I don't think that can be optimum.  People commonly set the focus at 1m for 
an 8mm lens.  F/16 won't necessarily give the sharpest images either, as 
smaller apertures suffer from diffraction effects.  Its best to do some 
careful tests to establish the best focus distance and aperture 
combination.  I had the Falcon version of this lens and found f/11 worked 
best for me.

The setup of the panorama head is good, but more care needs to be taken 
with the handheld nadir shot to make sure it captures a large enough area. 
 Here, the tips of two two feet leave holes at the nadir that have to be 
patched.  I did a stitch with PTGui using viewpoint correction for the 
nadir, but Hugin has a similar feature that can be used 
(see http://wiki.panotools.org/Image_positioning_model ).  FWIW, my stitch 
is uploaded to https://www.sendspace.com/file/gajmwr .

John
 

-- 
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 hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/03619f1b-e72c-4579-839a-2b95e16e6b92%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[dgjohnston]

My first recommendation would be for you to find out the hyperfocal focus 
distance for your aperture, lens, and camera combination; then use that to set 
your focus rather then infinity. For example your XS with an 8mm lens at f16 
would use a focus distance of 8 meters.
Don JohnstonSent from my Samsung device

 Original message 
From: Sukima <weaver.de...@gmail.com> 
Date: 2016-04-20  7:44 AM  (GMT-06:00) 
To: hugin and other free panoramic software <hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com> 
Subject: [hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow 

I need some feed back on how I work with making panoramas. I documented my work 
on my blog and copy/pasted it here. I would really appreciate any advice. 
Thanks.
I often thought my workflow 
was a bit unique. Though recently I found that it is not that unusual. I
 wanted to document the workflow for reference and because I've been 
running into some difficult results in my final panoramas and having the
 steps I took to get there might allow myself to get better feedback 
from others. At the bottom of this post is the final output. For those 
interested I am also offering my original images
 (in RAW format) to see if anyone might be willing to offer advise. I 
don't know if my troubles stem from my Lens, my Camera, my software, or 
my workflow. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Taking the pictures
I am using a Canon EOS Rebel XS (A.K.A. EOS 1000D) with a Bower 8mm Fisheye 
lens (A.K.A Pro-Optic, Samyang, or Rokinon). I mount my camera on a Panosaurus
 panoramic head on a tripod. I believe I've calibrated the parallax 
correctly to the best I could through the view finder and by taking 
several pictures with a close object and far object and rotating back 
and forth.I setup the tripod and start taking photos every 60 degrees (six 
images) around, one zenith, two nadir images 180 degrees from each other, and a 
final hand held nadir just in case.I
 use a wired remote shutter to lessen the jitter. I try to sample 
several angles before picking the final settings I use in manual mode. 
Since the lens doesn't have any communication with the camera I manually
 dial in the F-stop. I set the focus to infinity. I use the Raw format.
Pre-processing photos
I used RawTherapee
 to pre-process the Raw files I downloaded from the camera. Since the 
auto settings seemed pretty good I kept them except I set the white 
balance to Shade. I batch saved all the images to 16 bit TIFFs (Uncompressed).
Stitching
I used Hugin set to the Expert
 mode. I'm using version 2014 on the Mac because (at the time of this 
article) it is the only version available for the Mac. In Expert mode I 
add all the images including the hand held nadir. I used the Full Frame Fisheye
 with the Focal Length of '8' which in the past seemed like it worked. 
Mostly guess work here. Anyway Hugin auto populates the field of view 
for me and I go with it.Than I opened up the mask section and 
carefully draw exclusion masks around the tripod in all three nadir 
shots. Finally I click optimize and then open the GL Previw window. And 
everything looked great. I then opened the stitcher view and selected a width 
of 1024
 so the rendering would be super fast while I previewed. I found that 
the GL Preview glossed over some artifacts that you don't notice till 
the final renders.I noticed that the hand held nadir shot 
(although almost aligned) had parallax issues. Mainly since the nadir 
was a set of wood boards. So I gave up on the idea that the hand help 
nadir image was worth anything and deleted it from the image list in Hugin. I 
went back to the stitcher and selected Calculate optimal size and created a 
final version. Now with a gaping hole where the mask for the tripod was.
Editing the nadir
Since I use the GIMP to edit photos I have to convert the 16 bit TIFF to an 8 
bit TIFF using GraphicsMagick:
$ gm convert MillPano.tiff -depth 8 MillPano8.tif
Then I use the Panotools scripts to create my set of cubes:
$ erect2cubic --erect=MillPano8.tif --ptofile=cubic.pto
$ nona -o cube cubic.pto
In the GIMP I edited cube0005.tif and used the clone tool to carefully 
reconstruct the wood planks from the sides (this was challenging using a 
touchpad). Saved it to cube0005a.tif.Finally I reconstructed the panorama:
$ cubic2erect cube000{0,1,2,3,4,5a}.tif MillPanoFinal.tif
And this is the result:




Ye Olde Town Mill


QuestionsIs there a way to get Hugin
 to use a hand held nadir shot when the shot doesn't line up well with 
the shots taken via the tripod head? Would make nadir editing easier.Why is the 
final output blurry? Is it chromatic abrasion? Bad stitching? Crappy 
camera/lens?Download the Original Images. (100MB Zip)




-- 

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 fr

[hugin-ptx] Need help / Feedback on my workflow

[Sukima]

I need some feed back on how I work with making panoramas. I documented my 
work on my blog  and copy/pasted it here. I would 
really appreciate any advice. Thanks.


I often thought my workflow was a bit unique. Though recently I found that 
it is not that unusual. I wanted to document the workflow for reference and 
because I've been running into some difficult results in my final panoramas 
and having the steps I took to get there might allow myself to get better 
feedback from others. At the bottom of this post is the final output. For 
those interested I am also offering my original images 
 (in 
RAW format) to see if anyone might be willing to offer advise. I don't know 
if my troubles stem from my Lens, my Camera, my software, or my workflow. 
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.


Taking the pictures


I am using a Canon EOS Rebel XS 
 (A.K.A. EOS 1000D) with a 
Bower 
8mm Fisheye  lens (A.K.A 
Pro-Optic, Samyang, or Rokinon). I mount my camera on a Panosaurus 
 panoramic head on a tripod. I believe 
I've calibrated the parallax correctly to the best I could through the view 
finder and by taking several pictures with a close object and far object 
and rotating back and forth.

I setup the tripod and start taking photos every *60 degrees* (six images) 
around, one zenith, two nadir images 180 degrees from each other, and a 
final hand held nadir *just in case*.

I use a wired remote shutter to lessen the jitter. I try to sample several 
angles before picking the final settings I use in manual mode. Since the 
lens doesn't have any communication with the camera I manually dial in the 
F-stop. I set the focus to infinity. I use the *Raw format*.


Pre-processing photos


I used RawTherapee  to pre-process the 
Raw files I downloaded from the camera. Since the auto settings seemed 
pretty good I kept them except I set the white balance to *Shade*. I batch 
saved all the images to *16 bit TIFF*s (Uncompressed).

Stitching


I used Hugin  set to the *Expert* mode. I'm 
using version 2014 on the Mac because (at the time of this article) it is 
the only version available for the Mac. In Expert mode I add all the images 
including the hand held nadir. I used the *Full Frame Fisheye* with the 
Focal Length of '8' which in the past seemed like it worked. Mostly guess 
work here. Anyway Hugin auto populates the field of view for me and I go 
with it.

Than I opened up the mask section and carefully draw exclusion masks around 
the tripod in all three nadir shots. Finally I click optimize and then open 
the *GL Previw* window. And everything looked great. I then opened the 
stitcher view and selected a width of *1024* so the rendering would be 
super fast while I previewed. I found that the GL Preview glossed over some 
artifacts that you don't notice till the final renders.

I noticed that the hand held nadir shot (although almost aligned) had 
parallax issues. Mainly since the nadir was a set of wood boards. So I gave 
up on the idea that the hand help nadir image was worth anything and 
deleted it from the image list in Hugin . I 
went back to the stitcher and selected *Calculate optimal size* and created 
a final version. Now with a gaping hole where the mask for the tripod was.


Editing the nadir


Since I use the GIMP  to edit photos I have to 
convert the *16 bit TIFF* to an *8 bit TIFF* using GraphicsMagick 
:


$ gm convert MillPano.tiff -depth 8 MillPano8.tif


Then I use the Panotools  scripts to 
create my set of cubes:


$ erect2cubic --erect=MillPano8.tif --ptofile=cubic.pto$ nona -o cube cubic.pto


In the GIMP  I edited cube0005.tif and used 
the *clone tool* to carefully reconstruct the wood planks from the sides 
(this was challenging using a touchpad). Saved it to cube0005a.tif.

Finally I reconstructed the panorama:


$ cubic2erect cube000{0,1,2,3,4,5a}.tif MillPanoFinal.tif


And this is the result:


Ye Olde Town Mill 


Questions
   
   1. Is there a way to get Hugin  to use a 
   hand held nadir shot when the shot doesn't line up well with the shots 
   taken via the tripod head? Would make nadir editing easier.
   2. Why is the final output blurry? Is it chromatic abrasion? Bad 
   stitching? Crappy camera/lens?

*Download the Original Images 
.* 
(100MB Zip) 

-- 
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- 
You received this message