Carl,
First, thanks for your help serving as a moderator.
Could a single thread been made out of the 3 obviously related posts, the
third of which basically says the issue has been resolved or does the
software force you to create a separate thread for each moderated post?
I do find it a bit ironic that the main reason for the third post was to
alleviate the need for a response to the first post thereby lessening the
load rather than increasing it as has happened due to the creating of three
threads where one would have been sufficient and clearer.
Mike
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 8:03:28 AM UTC-8, zarl wrote:
>
> I can see no moderation issue here. Just an impatient new member.
>
> We don't need a real moderation for this very relaxed list. Only when
> new group members write a first message to the list (or someone uses a
> new email address instead of the one already used) those message(s) are
> queued for approval by one of the moderators. So one of them (either
> Bruno or me) makes sure that no spammer or harvester makes it through to
> the list members. As soon as we check our emails.
>
> All that we ask from a new list member is a little bit of patience and a
> good description of the problem so someone can answer the questions.
>
> fyi: moderation of this mailing list is not a paid job (and I guess you
> don't pay for the service).
>
> Please try to focus on one thread for this topic, three threads are a
> little bit distracting. And please don't use the subject line to write a
> longish story, thanks.
>
> Carl
>
> Mike Maas wrote on 06.12.16 00:27:
> > Because of the moderation there were 3 related messages posted in
> > sequence each of which apparently went into their own thread since while
> > awaiting moderation there was no thread to respond to.
> >
> > The initial question was as to whether or not there is a way to globally
> > turn off photometrics in order to simply stitch the images without
> > changing wb or exp.
> >
> > The answer, as far as I can tell is no.
> >
> > However the thread I referenced went into great detail about how to
> > change wb and exposure and why they don't always behave as one expects.
> > That information was sufficient for me to find a way to do what I was
> > looking for in terms of turning off wb and exp corrections for a single
> > stitch.
> >
> > I do think that a global switch to turn off all photometric changes
> > runtime rather than image by image would be useful but it apparently
> > does not exist.
> >
> > I am happy with and can work with the features as they currently exist
> > now that I know how to do so.
> >
> > HTH the confusion engendered by multiple unthreaded msgs on the same
> > topic to the moderation issue.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 10:19:09 AM UTC-8, Mike Maas wrote:
> >
> > I found a thread that answers most of my questions: hugin has become
> > unusable for me.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Mike
> >
>
--
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/ce6ff955-53ee-41f2-a679-a7fe80108a3a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
