Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2019-02-20 9:55 UTC+01:00, bugbear :
Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
I believe horizontal control points should only be used when assembling an
actual landscape panorama, to mark the horizon itself. I never assembled
flatbed or microscope images, but I did some mosaic
.
Optimising something with this many variables MUST (IME) be done incrementally.
BugBear
--
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 pano
and
cannot install autopano sift C. Hints are appreciated.
Do the sub-images overlap (like photographs) or do they tessalate edge to edge?
I've done maps both ways, and can advise.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You
.
BugBear
--
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 fro
, of the hole centres, under zoom.
L1 L6
First hole 366, 366
Last hole 3496,3496
mid hole 2117, 2125
In other words, on NON modified images, the extreme holes align, but the mid
ones don't.
It's a non linear scan!!!
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available
number of CPs and checking the output (layer mode in Gimp).
BugBear
--
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&q
focal length (AKA zoom) as
optimisation parameters.
Despite this simple model, along the low edge, I have perfect hole alignment at
far left and far right,
but poor hole alignment in the middle, very much as you did.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http
ms greatly
exceed the theoretical limitations you've described.
BugBear
--
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
is as fundamental as claimed, it ought to be quite glaring.
BugBear
--
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&q
ers.
Take a quick/rough 360 pano, let hugin work out the FOV, and take it from there.
Bugbear
--
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 pan
, the "external" program could in fact
be a wrapper script, calling an actual program
with an arbitrary command and/or list of control/parameter files.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message b
Marcel Brouillet wrote:
so merging RAW files seems to have sense to me.
How (on earth) does one perform spatial interpolation on raw data that
hasn't been de-mosaic'd ?!
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received
nicely.
BugBear
--
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 receiv
he user's discretion.
BugBear
--
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
eliminate it at source.
BugBear
--
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 grou
T. Modes wrote:
Thanks for testing.
Bugbear has send me his files. I could reproduce the crash with them. It is
related to an embedded ICC profile (without ICC profile it works fine).
I found the bug and fixed it in the repository.
Wow - you said you would fix it "
T. Modes wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2018 14:06:39 UTC+1 schrieb bugbear:
And found this command:
nona -m TIFF_multilayer -o multi_layer.tif project.pto
I ran it, and got a Segmentation fault (core dumped)
This is not reproducible here. The stack trace show that it crashes
of expensive windows science programs
that can do it, but I'd like something for a Linux box. Any ideas?
Hugin can do this, at least in the GUI. It's pretty much the norm to leave the
anchor image alone, although it's technically optional.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions
panoramas
the accuratest I have to be.
Perhaps the angular resolution should be dynamic - the increment should be
(about)
the angle subtended by a single pixel at the edge on the panorama.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You
to stay sane, I did a lock of locking of some image,
whilst adding and optimisation new images.
At any one time, only a few (20-30) images were visible, of which the older
ones were locked.
:-)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
ire tripod and
camera over
the item, grid-fashion. This is laborious to do, and laborious in hugin too.
BugBear
--
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
you don't even need a pano
head to do this, a normal tripod head is fine.
The feature you dislike so much is of great value when working with such a
photograph.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this
and stitching in any case)
render this problem vanishingly small.
BugBear
--
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&q
Oh. Dear.
I just loaded one of the shots into a fresh project,
and Hugin shows Hfov(v) 38.
It looks like the fault may well be all of my own making,
and not Hugin's at all.
I'm wondering if I did an ill advise optimise that included the FOV early
on, and forgot about it.
BugBear (off
T. Modes wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 22. Juni 2017 18:26:30 UTC+2 schrieb bugbear:
My current pto is attached.
I had a short look on it, the main problem is probably the wrong fov. (really
shoot with a 35 mm equivalent focal length of 120 mm from 1 m distance?).
It really was shot that way
uccessfully captured maps before using this approach
and am currently rather baffled as to my current failure.
BugBear
--
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 &
are:
1) Barrel distortion
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f234/bugbear33/misc/barrel.jpg
Sorry, it seems that this site wants me to disable my ad blocker. Can
you put it elsewhere?
Does this one work?
http://woodworkinfo.site88.net/barrel.JPG
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions
Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
On Thursday, 9 February 2017 at 17:18:10 +, bugbear wrote:
Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 9:28:53 +, paul womack wrote:
Is this the right list for enfuse/enblend questions?
Until proof of the contrary, yes. Fire away
-snapfuse-image-fusion-software
SnapFuse Image Fusion Software
The capabilities sound ... familiar,
it's on sale at $52.00, and I don't see any reference
to source.
http://www.mjkzz.com/product-page/snapfuse-image-fusion-software
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available
on all the others!
BugBear
--
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 grou
ht line control points
on a rectangle (as in te example PTO I sent you)
BugBear
--
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 panor
light sources for your next shoot.
BugBear
--
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 thi
so that my desired optimisation minimum was nearby in the search space.
(because my map was large, and some of my images had poor focus, my stitching
took
around 2 weeks of intermittent work!)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hu
itched map that I am quite
pleased with.
Could you send your project file (the .pto) to the list?
BugBear
--
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
In that case I recommend a script.
BugBear
Abrimaal wrote:
How many? Hundreds in every folder and hundreds of folders :)
On Wednesday, December 7, 2016 at 9:52:18 AM UTC+1, bugbear wrote:
Abrimaal wrote:
> No, taken with various cameras, in differe nt years, seasons, vari
Abrimaal wrote:
No, taken with various cameras, in different years, seasons, various objects
(mainly architecture)
How many photographs do you have?
This would affect the degree to which automation is worth
the time (and trouble) to implement.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked
/Panorama_scripting_in_a_nutshell.html#Simple_command-line_stitching
BugBear
--
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 u
the image to
create new CPs or remove them.
You could also mask, and then use "remove control points in masks"
BugBear
--
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 Gro
/en.shtml
http://hugin.sourceforge.net/tutorials/architectural/en.shtml
BugBear
--
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&q
me of them apparently common) have specific meanings
in the craft which you won't find in a normal dictionary, regardless of its
size/scope.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are
T. Modes wrote:
Am Montag, 10. Oktober 2016 11:26:34 UTC+2 schrieb bugbear:
I have now downloaded the source, and done some searching; I think this is
a list
of all the Exif and Xmp tags used by Hugin;
This list is far from complete. Some important information are missing. Please
T. Modes wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 10:23:06 UTC+2 schrieb bugbear:
What (IPTC) fields do I need to transfer to get the
best behaviour from Hugin?
Hugin does not read IPTC fields.
I have now downloaded the source, and done some searching; I think this is a
list
of all
than you'd like.
Others who frequent this forum have done quite a bit of work in perfecting
methods of stitching shots of large maps which are not exactly flat due to
creases from folds. Some of the experience with that may be applicable, not
sure.
Indeed.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently
the control points in again
You need to trust Hugin more...
If you do the control points, Hugin will sort everything out for
you automatically (most of the time...)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message
bugbear wrote:
Bruno Postle wrote:
On 27 September 2016 08:57:55 BST, paul womack wrote:
I wish to align some 2D images, some taken from the rear
of an item, some from the front.
"Clearly" one set of image will need to be mirror reversed.
Does hugin's model support this?
Ha
a (notably EXIF)?
BugBear
--
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 r
-axis photo of a gothic carved panel in a church,
to avoid a reflection.
Skewing the panel back to rectlinear caused the carving
too look "odd" in a non-obvious way.
http://galootcentral.com/components/cpgalbums/userpics/10152/gothic.JPG
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked
:-(
BugBear
--
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 e
software solve?
BugBear
--
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 receiv
Robert Giordano wrote:
First, thanks to everyone for their suggestions and tips!! I'm going to
describe my procedure and test results in detail for the benefit of people
reading this post in the future.
Excellent write up. Thank you. May the Karma be returned.
BugBear
--
A list
.
If they are both good and useful models of the same
distortions, they should indeed map onto each other,
"somehow", at least for realistic and/or common cases.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received th
the Hugin world?
Thank you,
Nicolas Ecarnot
I wrote a Unix tool a while ago to batch up sets of photographs, not for
panoramas,
but for HDR. I suspect it's similar.
It's 174 lines of Perl, but I suspect it may rely on some particularities on my
Camera and/or its Exif.
BugBear
Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2016-06-08 10:03 UTC+02:00, bugbear <bugb...@papermule.co.uk>:
Didn't there used to be a semi interactive GUI for enfuse, which would make
such experimentation, if not simpler, quicker and easier?
BugBear
Do you mean EnfuseGUI?
A quick google says "
a visible pattern.
Baseline Enfuse using --saturation-weight=0 --exposure-cutoff=0%%:95%%
--contrast-weight=0
Didn't there used to be a semi interactive GUI for enfuse, which would make
such experimentation, if not simpler, quicker and easier?
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is
/ start?
looking forward to get some good tips
Tip; RTFM.
BugBear
--
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&q
'dkloi' via hugin and other free panoramic software wrote:
If you can't place manual control points then it doesn't sound promising. Any
chance of uploading the source images?
Perhaps it would be possible to make a super-enhanced set of images, optimise,
and re-use the project file for the
this thread is from) I worked the following
out:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/hugin-ptx/nynP68FT5WA
BugBear
> Would they let you put the camera on a monopole and hold it above your head
to shoot down to the table? That might get you 4 to 6 feet away. Even if all
this were not permissi
bugbear wrote:
(see attached diagram, which is 2D, concerned with placing
the camera correctly on a plane)
Here's the diagram I was obviously referring to,
but was too stupid to attach!
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
tios
from the original target image.
So - what's the MINIMUM set of landmarks and ratios and what criteria do they
need to fulfil such that 2D placement of the camera is possible?
(and, having taken a trial photograph and calculated your new ratios from it,
how do you calculated the "move" the
bugbear wrote:
I will check today wether the row trick effects low-res blending.
Having set the pano to be total width 1, I allowed enblend 4.5 Gb of RAM,
the output tiff is only 9444x4940, 180 Mb.
blending to create 11 subrows: 188 Seconds;
blending 11 subrows together: tree style: 75
Luís Henrique Camargo Quiroz wrote:
Hi BugBear,
Thanks for sharing all that with us!
I was hoping someone with a little (or more) knowledge
of the internals of enblend to explain some of this.
I've been effectively black box/reverse engineering,
based on my own intuition
res blending.
BugBear
--
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 receivin
408, but the sub-row-creating benefits
outweigh this.
Total enblend time is 1271+2883 = 4154 = 69 minutes.
(The best result from the previous test was 2525 + 2408 = 4933 - 82 minutes)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_F
bugbear wrote:
It appears on testing so far that blending the images into rows first,
then blending the rows, so that the vertical seams are small, gives a great
saving on CPU.
I will do the "near the limit" memory test tonight, when I don't need my laptop
to be respon
G --ciecam; TIME 4758
ARG --no-ciecam; TIME 241
ARG; TIME 245
It looks like my ciecam default is "off"; just as well, ciecam seems to slow
things down by a factor of about 19!!
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You r
bugbear wrote:
Terry Duell wrote:
Hello Paul,
Is there any way to perform the blend in stages (either row at a time,
column at a time, or quarters/eighths at a time), that will improve performance
in the special case of a gigapix/mosaic?
I can't see a way to do that with enblend
inder.
I simply moved the camera+board backward and forward
on the line, doing test pivots, until parallax was at a minimum.
Admittedly, a fully adjustable pano head would
allow you to find the NPP with more accuracy, but this
was easy and cheap.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked ques
with it 10 years ago:
http://www.johnhpanos.com/spherical/zane5000/zane5000.html
I love that you bothered to paint it black!
BugBear
--
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
bugbear wrote:
T. Modes wrote:
Thanks for stripping down. That makes debugging a lot easier.
I found the issue and fixed in changeset daffca65ed45. It was an issue with the
translation parameters and the center pano horizontal function, so on the first
look total unrelated
bugbear wrote:
But this capture fault applies (sadly) to the whole
pano, but the particular difficulty only arises in one corner.
So - how good should I expect the result to be?
I have cut the problem down to a 4 image pano, which can
be downloaded (for the next week) from this link:
https
Bruno Postle wrote:
On 21 October 2015 11:25:38 BST, bugbear wrote:
As such, the lighting (just an archive room) was not only non uniform,
but the map was in a different place (relative to the lighting) for
each
session. In this example, the visual discontinuity "just ha
.
Looks like my project is throwing up several bugs - I must be doing something
unusual.
Many thanks for this (and previous) bug fixes.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed
bugbear wrote:
bugbear wrote:
I will now try my 173 image (*) "big map"
That worked too (took a while though...)
I hereby declare the bug fixed ;-)
"Darn"
I was premature. The optimisation was indeed (as of 7/10/2015) much better.
But whilst trying to tweak it,
worth talking
a preliminary shot, rather carefully, with lots of overlaps, stitching it
carefully,
and using the (optimised) camera specs for all the other shots.
In other words, do a calibration run.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hu
I will now try my 173 image (*) "big map"
BugBear
(*) The map is around 5 feet by 10 feet, the archive had no table big enough to
handle it in
its entireity, I was using a cantilevered tripod (Benbo) with a 30 inch reach.
I was taking
around A4 size section with an 8Mpixel camera
bugbear wrote:
I will now try my 173 image (*) "big map"
That worked too (took a while though...)
I hereby declare the bug fixed ;-)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message b
bugbear wrote:
I've added this to launchpad;
#1500342 exposure optimiser incorrectly ignoring some pairs
I note that this is now "Fixed in changeset f2e38d537544"
Can anyone tell me (or estimate)
how long such a fix will take to emerge in the packagers PPA?
BugBear
), exits with a
non-zero status.
- The shell has major problems handling filenames which contain special
characters.
Use quotes.
does this answer your question? Feel free to ask more details :-)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org
bugbear wrote:
I had a look at your project, to see if I could learn something.
I see the same behaviour here.
I experimented a bit, and found that by dragging the images so they both have
much smaller pitch values, the exposure optimises OK.
I know it's not an answer to your question
ler pitch values, the exposure optimises OK.
I know it's not an answer to your question.
Sounding a lot like a bug. Perhaps the pre-check doesn't
implement the full transform model?
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this
the limit of camera resolution
and lens magnification is reached.
Below this limit, simple tessalation (which hugin is rather good at) will
give a reliable increase in subject resolution.
bugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You
can still be extremely high res, if you use a long lens.
BugBear
--
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
David Haberthür wrote:
I thought if maybe the final result is somewhere publicly available, so we can
admire what has been done without having access to old maps ourselves :)
???
Old maps are readily available:
http://www.oldmapsonline.org
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked
layer tiff using nona,
and did final image generation in Gimp.
BugBear
--
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
Forex Valdes wrote:
Thanks Terry
Let me see if I got it right. I am using equirectangular.
... or you do two steps in one projecting and removing distorsion?
That's how it works. it's analagous to wanting to multiply by 2 and then by 3.
Hugin multiplies by 6. :-)
BugBear
--
A list
Bruno Postle wrote:
On Mon 01-Jun-2015 at 23:59 +0100, Bruno Postle wrote:
On 1 June 2015 13:15:59 BST, bugbear wrote:
OK. Ptomorph has a tiny bug in its path handling.
it uses the same path prefix for its output files
as its PTO file.
The upshot is, the path must be either absolute
into a small number of transform parameters;
for ptomorph, each and every CP is acted on fairly directly.
I suspect this means:
manual CPs only
I am discovering that you also need a LOT of CPs for ptomorph
to give a truly perfect result for localised bumps.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked
doesn't work, because the resulting morph.pto contains
references to morph/morph_.png (etc).
I have to (in Unix);
( cd morph; ptomorph -o morph.pto ../manual4morph.pto )
which works nicely.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
.
BugBear
--
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
Roger Broadie wrote:
grid-square P25, where the different shapes of the square as captured in
e.g. images 17 and 23 illustrate graphically the problems of the parallax present
in places in your images.
You may have a point ;-)
(see attached)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked
. :-)
BugBear
--
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
. They aren't using any special type of
glass.
I am not allowed to touch the map at all in the achive - it's a hand drawn
original from 1816.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed
smaller (and hence CP
pixel
distances smaller) as X and Y are further from the origin. I believe this is
the driver of
the bogus attractor I'm seeing.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because
) I
get the rather better:
avg: 0.79
std: 0.57
max: 4.00
and it has swung the whole pano around 180 degrees.
If anyone can explain what's going on, I'd be grateful.
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received
paul womack wrote:
There seems to a underlying, unspoken theme in the recent discussions
on variant/nested data.
Wrong list (obviosuly).
Nothing to see here :-)
BugBear
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received
directly in the preview window.
BugBear
--
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
FOV (being the aggregate of
many sub-images with a reasonable FOV), simply set the Z
of the anchor (the one image that doesn't have an optimised Z)
to be less than 0; say -.5. Then reoptimise.
Everything shrinks nicely.
BugBear
paul womack wrote:
Still preparing to visit an archive
Roger Broadie wrote:
Paul Womack (BugBear) pwom...@papermule.co.uk wrote on Wed, 13 May 2015 at
17:14:48 +0100, with a follow-up on Fri, 15 May 2015 at 09:01:07 +0100, about the
procedure he intends to follow in photographing an historic map in an archive.
I agree that the FOV is not a big
Stefan Peter wrote:
Hi BugBear
I have updated the hugin and enblend/enfuse packages in ppa:hugin/next
to the versions used in debian jessie. This should cure quite some
problems with failing asserts. Please have a look, if these versions fix
your problems I will move them over to ppa:hugin
bugbear wrote:
Stefan Peter wrote:
Hi BugBear
I have updated the hugin and enblend/enfuse packages in ppa:hugin/next
to the versions used in debian jessie. This should cure quite some
problems with failing asserts. Please have a look, if these versions fix
your problems I will move them over
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
