Re: [hugin-ptx] enfuse: feature proposal to evaluate 'technical' qualities

2012-02-09 Thread Robert Krawitz
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 01:51:15 -0800 (PST), kfj wrote:
 Hi group!

 I'd like to point you to a feature proposal I've made for enfuse, and
 I'd be curious to hear what you think of it:

 https://bugs.launchpad.net/enblend/+bug/927509

In regards focal length of source image: this would have been very
useful to me when preparing this image:
http://rlk.smugmug.com/Other/Landscapes/4851912_XB4SmT#!i=450968307k=6dotV
(read the writeup)

I'd also like to see consideration given to combining the blending and
fusing steps.  I've experimented with both blend-fuse and fuse-blend
workflows (exposure fused from stacks and exposure fused from any
arrangement -- and no, I don't remember which is which) and find that
both approaches work better in some cases than in others.  Blending
exposure layers followed by fusing produces a more uniform fused
panorama, but the blend seams may be different in the different exposure
layers, leading to ghosting (not just for moving object).  This happens,
I think, because most of my panoramas are hand-held, and when I do use a
tripod it isn't with a panorama head, so there are perspective issues
that are resolved differently in each layer.  If I fuse exposure layers
first and then blend the stacks, the ghosting goes away but I get odd
color/tonal contrasts across the blend seams.

What I think I'd like would be to blend followed by fuse, but to use the
same blending seams for each exposure layer.  I realize this would be a
very big change from how things are done now.

-- 
Robert Krawitz r...@alum.mit.edu

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom  --  http://ProgFree.org
Project lead for Gutenprint   --http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works.
--Eric Crampton

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Hugin and other free panoramic software group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx


Re: [hugin-ptx] enfuse: feature proposal to evaluate 'technical' qualities

2012-02-09 Thread Bruno Postle

On Thu 09-Feb-2012 at 09:44 -0500, Robert Krawitz wrote:


What I think I'd like would be to blend followed by fuse, but to 
use the same blending seams for each exposure layer.  I realize 
this would be a very big change from how things are done now.


If you set the enblend --no-optimize parameter then the seams will 
be in a consistent location, though they won't exactly line-up 
unless your stacks are perfect.  The seam optimisation isn't so 
important if you are using masks.


--
Bruno

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Hugin and 
other free panoramic software group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx