Re: [hugin-ptx] Hide grid and panosphere by default

2020-04-15 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi,

if I change their appearance in the window menu via View-> Grid / Overview,
this setting is preserved as the new default, i.e. when exiting and
restarting hugin.
This is with hugin 2019.2 on Debian testing. If this doesn't work for you,
on which platform are you?

Cheers
Felix

On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 10:39, 'ChameleonScales' via hugin and other free
panoramic software  wrote:

> Hi,
> Is there a way to have the grid and panosphere hidden by default in the GL
> window?
> If not, consider this a feature request to add checkboxes for it in the
> preferences.
> I assume the User Interface area in the General tab would be the place for
> that.
>
> --
> 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/2tf1oA1SskywqLwxEq-Ye9mLA8yt01yhoy0LZ3U5xq9uVAdZf42__LljmxoaZAvk-TdvJzqWjvA3hWqrEaz7MtE9yxdLkfnjbM4StFwdzV4%3D%40protonmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/2tf1oA1SskywqLwxEq-Ye9mLA8yt01yhoy0LZ3U5xq9uVAdZf42__LljmxoaZAvk-TdvJzqWjvA3hWqrEaz7MtE9yxdLkfnjbM4StFwdzV4%3D%40protonmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>


-- 
Felix Hagemann
Burgstelle 26
38112 Braunschweig
Tel. 0174/2414766

-- 
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/CAOcPne9otXBopNRgUTodU6L1L2x0586N8K81bti_OkFfjPeXEA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Can I automatically improve stitching?

2014-03-20 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 20 March 2014 10:14, Pawel Rozenek wrote:
> [...]  Also it does not make a different
> if the ball head it not adjusted exactly horizontally - then just a nadir
> and zenith are not exactly where they should be. If you do not believe me, I
> can make a short video showing how it works :)

While I don't know your setup, I was unpleasently suprised a number of
times by the amount of flex added by anything between my tripod and a
pano head (e.g. a ball head).

> Anyway, still no one answered my question - is it possible to improve
> stitching by changing Hugin settings?

As I said before: I might be enough to include d and e during the
optimization, if you haven't done that before.

Regards
Felix

-- 
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/CAOcPne-D%3DO34jNTUJKc-tMwyaBQYMpSeC41gszUa2TUz1uWsag%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Can I automatically improve stitching?

2014-03-19 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 19 March 2014 08:04, Pawel Rozenek wrote:
> [snip]
> http://www.rozenek.com/images/forum/hugin-problem.jpg
>
> It is NOT a problem with my bracket, because I designed a special bracket 
> just for my camera:
> http://www.rozenek.com/a-new-version-of-the-panoramic-bracket-for-my-camera/
> so I have got a perfect nodal point.

Just a two quick remarks:
If you are using a fisheye lens (but rectilinear one as well) then
there is no such thing as a perfect nodal point:
the 
http://michel.thoby.free.fr/Fisheye_history_short/Entrance_Pupil_Shift_on_real_lenses.html

In my experience the errors that you observe are mainly due to either
not optimising for d,e (which should even be done if you have a good
lens profile due to play in the mount) or caused by an insufficient
spread of control points.

Regards,
Felix

-- 
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/CAOcPne_ov%2B5WXrt1ZhmUB0hnx8%2BkZpyDN7nJjb7b6zXFDhGY5w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Perspective correction woes....

2013-10-09 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Bob Mahar:

> Picking a cluster of 4-6 adjacent shots gives similar results, and
stitching those intermediate shots same again.It just seems to be
completely ignoring the horizontal control points.   There must be some
threshold I am violating angle wise.  I was able to use Gimp to modify the
perspective after the fact, seems to produce nearly identical output.
Given I can fix in post, I give up... ;-)If I find some magic that
fixes this, I'll post it.

Just a wild guess: What is the output projection you are using? Horizontal
lines only do are "real" horizontal lines in rectilinear protection.

Felix

-- 
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/CAOcPne_YViKj8N2u%3DmK-JxupZZcd0N2VTDyy9qhtxWGGu6S0Sg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Small errors, Projection formula and Preview

2013-04-25 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 24 April 2013 21:19, Bruno Postle  wrote:
> So I suggest you try a series of tests with different optimisation settings:
>
> - roll, yaw and view
> - roll, pitch and yaw
> - roll, pitch, yaw and view
> - everything

Let me add one more thing here: In my experience you need to add d and
e as parameters to optimize even if you leave the others (like v and
a-c) to the lens calibration. Those vary each time you take the lens
off and mount it again.

Also the posted example to me looks like there isn't a sufficient
spread of control points along the whole overlap between two images
which causes the stitching errors. But then I'm used to ultra wide
angle or fisheye lenses.

Felix

-- 
-- 
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

--- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Action Sequence Errors - Too much overlap and distorted image

2013-04-18 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi,

regarding the distortion probably the easiest way to identify your
problem would be to let us look at a saved .pto file from such a hugin
session. And maybe one example photo.
Regarding the excesive overlap there is an easy but cumbersome fix:
You need to use masks so that each image contributes at least a bit.
The easiest way to achieve this is to use "positive" masks called
"Include region" in the mask tab. This will cut this region from all
other images so you need put those on to the moving object in the
action sequence that you want depict.

Hope this helps,
Felix

On 15 April 2013 18:12, Burt Dial  wrote:
> Hi, I'm new to photography and just recently loaded hugin.  I took an action
> sequence of photos where the camera position was static (i.e. complete
> overlap for all photos).  The resulting image (from the fast preview) is
> heavily distorted regarldess of projection used and when attempted to run
> the stitcher I get errors for too much overlap.  The exposure is the same
> for all photos.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  I'll gladly provide
> more details to my project if needed.  Thanks in advance.
>
> Burt Dial
>
> --
> --
> 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
>
> ---
> 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.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

-- 
-- 
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

--- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: colors and brightness change when stitching

2013-01-03 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 11 December 2012 10:57, Michael  wrote:
> Here is an example of the original image, and the same part cropped from the
> big stitched image.

A very late reply, but going through my unread mails I just saw your
example images and I have seen very similar, washed out colors when
camera response curve parameters had been optimised. Can you try
reseting them to zero as well, or just post the pto file, so we can
see if those parameters were non-zero?

Felix

-- 
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] Rectilinear or fisheye lens: which is better?

2012-12-04 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 29 November 2012 02:32, Greg 'groggy' Lehey  wrote:
>
> Where do you find that?  I've tried this in the "Camera and Lens" tab
> with a photo taken vertically with the 9 mm lens.  If I select
> "Rectilinear" it tells me 71.5° vertically, which presumably ignores
> the fact that it's mounted vertically, and doesn't say anything about
> HFOV.  That tallies relatively well with my program above.  But when I
> select "circular fisheye" it comes up with (only) 92.8°.  That's some
> way from my estimate of 108°.  Is there some other place you can get
> similar results?

As far as I remember hugin (or panotools) only refer to HFOV
throughout, which depends on the orientation of the image data (so
lens corrections values will also depend on image data orientation). I
always input my images in portrait and fix any rotation by assigning
roll values. Nevertheless you can play with the crop and focal length
values and the projection and hugin will calculate an an "estimate"
for the hfov, that's how i came up with the cited figures.

Diagonal fov on the other hand will be influenced by a,b,c lens parameters.

> I also get the same results whether I select "full frame fisheye" or
> "circular fisheye".  What's the difference?

Basically only the kind of crop that can be applied to the image,
circular vs. rectangular. The very same lens can be a full frame
fisheye or a circular fisheye depending on the sensor size of your
camera.

> In any case, I can't see any mathematical correspondence between the
> focal length and the angle of view for fisheyes.  Can anybody point me
> at some background information?

There is no single mathematical correspondence. It all depends on the
form of the projection function, of which the focal length typically
is the derivative at the lens center. The Samyang is special in that
regard as it features a ("stereographic") fisheye projection that is
different than that of most (all ?) other fisheyes.

>> Back to the original question:
>> For me the step from a wide angle rectilinear to a fisheye was very
>> well worth doing. The noticable but bearable quality difference is
>> outweighted by the much easier stitching with the lower number of
>> shots, especially so for 360x180s.
>
> That's interesting.  I've asked on the German Olympus forum and got a
> reply from Reinhard Wagner (the author mentioned above) that confirmed
> my suspicion that the distortion would be less, since a 360x180°
> panorama is a form of fisheye image anyway, and the image needs to be
> distorted less.  If you're interested, the thread is at
> http://oly-e.de/forum/e.e-system/135036.htm

Having read that thread, I think both views (fisheyes do not need that
much distortion or fisheyes need a lot more distortion) aren't exactly
right.

Typically the final format for a spherical pano is an equirectangular
file. And whether your input images are fisheye or rectilinear doesn't
matter that much, as there is always going to be a lot of mapping (or
distortion if you want) going on, especially near the poles. The main
quality loss here is caused by interpolation, but interpolation
routines are good enough (if don't choose bilinear or similar) that
you will not be able to tell a difference by eye even if you do
interpolation back and forth a few times.

Another issue is the compression at the extreme edges of the fisheye.
But this can easily be dealt with by sufficient overlap and crop.

Felix

-- 
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] Find specific projection and batch apply

2012-12-04 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi Poul,

basically you already found the projection parameters and saved them
to the pto file. If you have a look at the pto file your "projection
parameters" (actually lens and position) are within the "i lines". If
you want to apply those for a large batch of images (assuming that
your cameras are _very_ stable in their relative position) you can
call nona directly with the pto you have created ones and the image
files you want to process now.

For your case this would look like:
nona -o remapped_ DSC_0069-DSC_0070.pto new_image1.jpg new_image2.jpg

If you are using bash or a similar shell then this can easily be
scripted to loop over all your images.

There are a few caveats tough:
- In my experience the shift lens parameters (d,e) are different each
time you have taken the lens off and mounted it again. So you will
need to redo your pto each time you have unmounted a lens.
- Depending on what you meant with "stack" you will most likely run
into parallax issues as the two lenses and cameras can't be in exactly
the same spot.
- I would use a lot more control points when determining the
parameters. Also you had at least one control point that was off.

Hope this helps,
Felix

-- 
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] Rectilinear or fisheye lens: which is better?

2012-11-28 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 28 November 2012 12:10, Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
 wrote:
> Going back to your specific example, I don't think 9mm will have a much
> narrow angle than an 8mm lens. Do you have their fov to compare? Probably
> you will use the same number of images to stitch and will have almost the
> same final image size.

Having shot myself in the past with a 10mm rectilinear lens (Sigma
10-20mm) and a 10mm fisheye (Tokina 10-17mm) I can tell you that the
difference in hfov is very noticeable. It's basically the difference
between 2 rows of 8 shots, nadir, zenith (so 18 shots total) and 6
shots around, nadir, zenith (maybe two, I don't remember right now) so
8 oder 9 shots in total.

You can actually enter the numbers in hugin to get an estimate.
Assuming crop factor 2 9 mm rectilinear yields 90° hfov while 8 mm
circular fisheye yields about 130° hfov.

Back to the original question:
For me the step from a wide angle rectilinear to a fisheye was very
well worth doing. The noticable but bearable quality difference is
outweighted by the much easier stitching with the lower number of
shots, especially so for 360x180s.

Cheers,
Felix

-- 
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] when to sharpen?

2012-09-11 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 11 September 2012 08:54, TvE  wrote:
> This probably an FAQ, but I couldn't find an answer: when do you sharpen
> spherical panoramas? Before compositing (i.e. sharpen the original images)
> or afterwards, and if so, using what type of projection (I need to output
> equirectangular in the end)?

I've been experimenting with the projection to do the sharpening on
quite some time ago. I was mainly trying to sort out if there is a
practical difference between:
(i) Sharpening the final equirectangular. In theory this should be a
bad idea due to the "messed" up neighbourhoods near the poles.
(ii) Create six rectilinear 90x90 images, sharpen those and reassemble
to an equirectangular.

While the difference images showed some very minor differences I was
unable to distinguish the images created by those two methods
visually. I've been sharpening equirects ever since...

Felix

-- 
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] Re: Version-dependent control point detection problems

2012-07-09 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 8 July 2012 07:11, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>
> I'm still investigating things, and there's a lot more to say.  It
> seems that both panomatic and cpfind will create control points on a
> single image, and not even correctly.  One example is at
> http://www.lemis.com/grog/diary-jul2012.php#hugin-bug , but I've seen
> it with cpfind as well.

Just a quick heads up in case you didn't notice: Those are vertical
line control points and they look pretty good actually. This is a
recently added feature (linefind) which adds vertical line control
points automatically and has nothing to do with either cpfind or
panomatic.

Felix

-- 
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] Global alignment problem for video stabilization scripts

2012-01-02 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi,

>
http://lear.inrialpes.fr/people/gaidon/media/buggy_stabilized_high_jump.avi

This looks like ffmpeg doesn't know about "cropped" tiffs where are an
absolute position offset is encoded in one tag.
You could try to add one additional step:
4b) run PTuncrop on the output from nona

Felix

-- 
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] Hugin - Problem with a panorama

2011-12-20 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Sorry, I just realized that I have made the quite large tif images
available. You can get much smaller (< 600kB each) jpg-version here:
(ii)
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_U6XBhxp9i1MDMwMTc0NzQtODZjNS00MmUyLWFhZTgtZjkxNWQ1MTJkNmE4
(iii)
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_U6XBhxp9i1NDAxNzA4ZDYtYmVlZC00MzBjLWI5YjgtNzkxZDA3ZmQwZmI3

Felix

-- 
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] Hugin - Problem with a panorama

2011-12-20 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hello Giulio,

as I had similar problems in the past I tried a few different techniques to
see if those could give a better result.
I mainly tried three different routes:
(i)
Optimize exposure in each "nominal" exposure set separately and enfuse the
result. I got nicely blended skies but a very visible darkening of the
ground to the right.
(ii)
Enfuse the original image stacks before loading those enfused images into
hugin. Optimize exposure in hugin and stitch. The brightness gradient is
mainly gone. The result looks a bit flat and desaturated, but I guess you
can fix this in post:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_U6XBhxp9i1ZGI3YTQwMWEtMzNmMC00YjVkLTg1ZWEtZjYzNTEwZGUyODlh
(iii)
Stitch each "nominal" exposure set to one pano and enfuse those three panos
afterwards. The result is very similar to (ii):
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_U6XBhxp9i1YjU5NGI0ZTktNDc4NS00NTFkLTkzOTYtZmZlMDAyMTkxNjY3

Hope this give some more ideas,
Felix

-- 
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] IRC

2011-11-25 Thread Felix Hagemann 
I've been looking into the #hugin channel every now and then a few
years ago. It wasn't especially busy at the time but there were a
couple of people around. If I remember correctly then the channel was
set up by Dale Beams and he had administrator rights for it.

Dale, are you around? Do you know anything about the #hugin channel,
which does not seem to be open for anybody to join any more?

Cheers
Felix

-- 
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] Fisheye lenses, exif data and projection

2011-10-17 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi Thomas,

thanks for effort. Basically I see this as the foundation for a
feature that would be very, very welcome: Automatic loading of lens
profiles, either as hugin's ini files or even using lensfun...
I haven't had a chance to compile a development version but those are
the results using exiv2:

Tokina ATX 3,5-4,5/10-17 on a Canon cam:
Exif.CanonCs.LensTypeShort   1  Canon EF
20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Exif.CanonCs.LensShort   3  10.0 - 17.0 mm

Sigma 8mm f/3.5 on a Canon as well:
Exif.CanonCs.LensTypeShort   1  Sigma 8mm
f/3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye
Exif.CanonCs.LensShort   3  8.0 mm

Projection is circular fisheye for both (as the Tokina is shaved and
on a fullframe). I guess an "i" line says it all:
Tokina 10-17mm:
i w2920 h4386 f2 v117.772439775232 Ra0 Rb0 Rc0 Rd0 Re0 Eev0 Er1 Eb1
r-0.26688363778535 p6.42867375867582 y8.88850974602797 TrX0 TrY0 TrZ0
j0 a-0.076564228939927 b0.146416251483121 c-0.127273572255958
d3.29060949385297 e32.542981069 g0 t0 Va1 Vb-0.18283780242918
Vc0.141516026005642 Vd-1.72893502580412 Vx0 Vy0  S-571,3497,192,4260
Vm5 u10 n"fused_img_7119_ca.tif"
Sigma 8mm:
i w2920 h4386 f2 v188.893386867747 Ra-0.0238978080451488
Rb-0.00565842119976878 Rc0.0556895099580288 Rd0.0127557357773185
Re0.0257034469395876 Eev12.9657842161378 Er1 Eb1 r88.2204948922683
p-0.766704317808744 y7.84659018364293 TrX0 TrY0 TrZ0 j0 a-0.0364017
b-0.0961726510604123 c-0.025814 d4.67388 e29.6742 g0 t0 Va1
Vb-0.279826201600424 Vc-1.52248326430879 Vd-2.2738137786917 Vx0 Vy0
S80,2850,838,3608 Vm5 u10 n"jmg_4601_ca.tif"

Cheers
Felix

-- 
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] Re: New primary seam generator in Enblend

2011-09-15 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi Kay,

this pretty much sounds like a known bug in enblend:
bugs.launchpad.net/enblend/+bug/785803
bugs.launchpad.net/enblend/+bug/766501

On 15 September 2011 14:41, kfj wrote:
>
> P.S. it seems to have to do with masking. I threw out all masks from
> the original project I first saw the problem with, and it stitches
> fine now (with my feet and all in it, of course ;)

It's often seen with masks, but seems to be caused by the blending
geometry in general. You can try to change the image order, the size
of the remapped images (scale up or down) or change yaw. All of those
sometimes seem to help.

Felix

-- 
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] Mercurial browse disappeared from sourceforge site

2011-08-18 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 19 August 2011 07:58, Terry Duell wrote:
>
> Can someone please try  and
> report if you get the normal page showing who committed what to which
> branch?

Same problem here, no matter which browser I use. Looking at
http://dvisvgm.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/dvisvgm/
this looks as if it's not specific to hugin.

Cheers,
Felix

-- 
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] Hugin Session Recipes

2011-05-03 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi Carlos & others,

nice pano head you made and a very nice pano. I found just one or two
small stitching errors.

> I'd like to thank Markku, that told me that it makes huge difference. Now I
> have to agree with him. Even not calibrating it precisely I have already
> done some panoramas in less than one hour and didn't have to correct them
> with A LOT of GIMP work as I was doing before.

If you go to extremes, i.e. panos with objects extremely close to as
well as far from the camera, you might want to do a proper calibration
anyway. I found Smooths method useful:
http://www.easypano.com/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?ForumID=1&TopicID=4162&PagePosition=1

> I am taking 8 horizontal pictures. When mouting the final pano I sometimes
> use only 4, but I can´t take only 4 pictures, because that way it gets
> sometimes difficult to put the control points. + 1 zenith + 1 nadir. In fact

What camera + lens combination are you using? Is that a 7D plus one of
the Samyang clones?

>> - Shoot raw.
>
> Today I did my first shoot using raw... lets see the difference next days
> when I take the time to work on it.

For me this has basically two reasons:
1. Being able to create pseudo-bracketed shots from one raw for enfusing.
2. Being able to correct chromatic aberration on the tifs. I couldn't
get good results on jpgs.

>> - Optimise: Positions (incremental from anchor)
>> - Optimise: Positions (y,p,r)
>> - Check fast preview
>> - If the fast preview looks good:
>>  + Optimise y,p,r only for the nadir shot using custom parameters
>
> I am doing like you, but at the end I also use "Everything without
> translation" and it is giving me some good results.

I tend to avoid this, but have done quite often in the past. For me it
does not improve the result when a correct lens profile is used and
the nadir shot is not included. It does often improve the position of
the nadir shot if included, but degrades the rest.

>>  + Exposure optimisation using custom parameters to exclude Camera
>> Response
>
> I don´t do that. Maybe I will try, but I don´t see exposure problems on my
> final results... :/

I mostly have them when the illumination is changing (clouds, ..).
Often hugin is even then able to do a good job, correcting the
problems.

>> - Save project, close hugin and stitch on the command line with "make
>> -f pano.pto.mk"
>
> Thats what hugin does, isn't it? I mean, there is no difference on doing
> this from hugin or from the command line I guess.

Sure, it does not change the result. But it allows me to get rid of
the window during the the stitching which can take a few hours. Also I
can then pause and resume the process easily.

> Helped a lot. Thank you.

Good to hear,
Felix

-- 
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] Hugin Session Recipes

2011-04-20 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi Carlos,

On 20 April 2011 17:11, Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)  wrote:
> [...]
> Anybody makes those 360x180 panoramas in less than an hour regularly?

Yes, I do. At least when I haven't done something stupid while
shooting (bump the tripod, shot handheld, ...) and do not count the
hours my computer does its work all alone (batch creation of tifs from
raw, ca removal, remapping, blending).
This is for a typical 4 around every 90° + 1 zenith + 1 (handheld)
nadir shot either using an Sigma 8mm on a 1.6 crop camera or a Tokina
10-17mm at 12mm with a fullframe camera.
The most important factor to achieve a quick and good stitch is taking
the images right. For me this means:
- Test your lens to find the best focus and aperture settings. Tape focus.
- If using a zoom lens: tape zoom.
- Shoot raw.
- Find your nodal point settings.
- Calibrate them again. Make sure they are correct, especially the
lower rail if you are using a NN3 type pano head.
- Leveling is only needed if there are no vertical features visible to
put vertical line control points on.

I then use a collection of shell scripts to
- convert raw to tif (using ufraw-batch)
- correct chromatic aberration (using tca_correct).

Hugin workflow:
- Load images (Images->Add individual images)
- Apply lens profile (Camera and Lens->Load lens)
- Apply crop to all images
- Mask out parts of the tripod or the pano head if visible
- Run cpfind with default parameters
- Open the fast preview and deselect the handheld nadir shot, as it
will ruin alignment
- Optimise: Positions (incremental from anchor)
- Optimise: Positions (y,p,r)
- Check fast preview
- If the fast preview looks good:
  + Optimise y,p,r only for the nadir shot using custom parameters
  + Exposure optimisation using custom parameters to exclude Camera Response
- If the fast preview shows stitching errors, most of the times it's
due to bad control points.
  + Try to get rid of them automatically (Images->Run Celeste and
Images->Clean control points)
  + Reoptimise, if result is still bad:
  + Look at the CP table (F3) to delete control points with large
errors, ignoring ones on the nadir image
  + Reoptimise, if result is still bad:
  + Use Edit->Fine-tune all Points, use Select by distance in the
control point table and enter -0.8, press delete to remove all control
points with low correlation
  + Reoptimise, if result is still bad:
  + Go through all images and look at the control points. Are they
spread out sufficiently? Are some located on objects very close to the
camera? Add and delete points where necessary. This takes a long time,
so no pano in 1h if you reach this stage...
  + Reoptimise, if result is still bad: Give up, stitch it and see if
you can rescue it in GIMP.
- Change canvas size, output to TIFF
- Save project, close hugin and stitch on the command line with "make
-f pano.pto.mk"
- Use erect2cubic (from Panotools::Script) to fix the nadir and zenith
image in GIMP.
- Use cubic2erect to reassemble.
- Use a bit of levels/curves in GIMP, mostly to brighten the mid tones.

Wow, that got a lot longer than anticipated. Using this workflow I
mostly succeed within one hour (again: not counting the computer
working, stitching alone takes an hour or so). If not, it's almost
always due to me shooting handheld or accidentally moving the tripod.
But I also have to admit that sometimes a supposedly perfect shot is
not stitching right no matter how much I try... Kicked the tripod
without noticing? Mounted the camera tilted? I don't know.

Hope this helps a bit,
Felix

-- 
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] Re: New hugin-mac-2010.5.0-4886:a1cb4a2efa65 incl. cpfind with new ransac and bugfixes

2011-02-14 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 14 February 2011 15:14, voschix wrote:
>
> After running "fine-tune control points" the control points list does
> not show the correlation values, but still shows distances. In the
> Windows versions that I have been using (the latest is 2010.4) this is
> not the case.

This problem was present during a short period only and was fixed on
29/01/2011(http://bugs.launchpad.net/hugin/+bug/709489). Newer
snapshots should be ok.

Felix

-- 
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] Fwd: Google Summer of Code 2011 Announced

2011-02-03 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 1 February 2011 01:07, dmg wrote:
> I just did a very simple tests. My computer has a SSD, hence I think
> the results are skewed:
>
> This is PTmender, run 3 times:
>  Voluntary Context Switches 2; real 2.72; sys 0.05
>  Voluntary Context Switches 2; real 2.73; sys 0.09
>  Voluntary Context Switches 1; real 2.73; sys 0.06
>
> And this is Nona:
>
> Voluntary Context Switches 18; real 7.98; sys 0.27
> Voluntary Context Switches 19; real 7.94; sys 0.31
> Voluntary Context Switches 25; real 8.19; sys 0.31
>
> [...]
>
> If anybody can run these tests in a regular hard drive, that would be
> great. I have the feeling that IO will increase nona's time,
> but that is only a hunch:

PTMender:
Voluntary Context Switches 2; real 9.14; sys 0.24
Voluntary Context Switches 4; real 9.82; sys 0.18
Voluntary Context Switches 3; real 10.50; sys 0.14

Nona:
Voluntary Context Switches 13; real 43.98; sys 0.40
Voluntary Context Switches 1; real 60.32; sys 0.49
Voluntary Context Switches 1; real 56.58; sys 0.44

This is on a regular (and quite slow) hard drive on a fairly slow
system. Obviously I need something beefier for stitching...
Hope it helps,
Felix

-- 
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] Re: Declaring 2010.4.0 final and moving on

2011-01-01 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 1 January 2011 20:32, Yuval Levy wrote:
> On January 1, 2011 11:05:34 am Felix Hagemann wrote:
>> Stitching a recent full sperical nighttime pano using 3 exposures (-2,0,+2)
>> the blended and fused pano was a lot sharper than the fused and blended
>> one.
>
> any camera movement between exposures, such as a vibrating tripod or even hand
> held shot?

No, carefully shot with a NN3 on a sturdy tripod. Also I seem to
remember that the sharpness differences occured in a few places, so
one accidental kick to the tripod should not have been the cause. I'll
try to investigate further next week.

Felix

-- 
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] Re: Declaring 2010.4.0 final and moving on

2011-01-01 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 1 January 2011 16:33, Yuval Levy wrote:
>
> What advantage do you see in first blending the exposure layers and then
> enfusing, rather than doing it the other way around (which is computationally
> lighter)?

While I'm not Rick who was initially adressed above, I'd like to share a recent
experience:
Stitching a recent full sperical nighttime pano using 3 exposures (-2,0,+2) the
blended and fused pano was a lot sharper than the fused and blended one.
I haven't had the time to check with different panos yet. Currently
I'm travelling
and have no access to the pto and the images but I think I should be able to
dig them out next week, if anybody should be interested.

Happy New Year and congratulations for the release,
Felix

-- 
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] masking cropped images

2010-12-06 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi

On 3 December 2010 21:54, kfj wrote:
>[...]
>
> Additionally, it would be nice if the cropping actually was visible in
> the masking dialog.

+1. I've been bitten by include masks in the cropped area as well.

> Musing about this I did wonder whether the cropping feature is still
> worth very much now that masking is here and, in my opinion, more
> versatile. Is there anything that can be done with it that one cannot
> do with masks? What springs to mind is the inclusion of the cropping
> in the lens ini file, which potentially saves some work. But maybe it
> wouldn't be too difficult to add masks to the lens ini, rather - then,
> I think the cropping dialog might even become obsolete.

While I like the idea of merging the crop tab with the mask tab, I
think there is a fundamental problem with the approach:
One the one hand masking as well as adding control point should best
done on remapped images. I think already is a wishlist items for this.
On the other hand cropping is mainly used to cut off dark edges of
input fisheye images, which can be sensibly done on the original
images only.

Regards
Felix

-- 
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] Fused exposures are too light!

2010-10-25 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 24 October 2010 18:46, Robert Krawitz  wrote:
> One more experiment.
>
> I tried creating remapped images in two ways:
>
> * Exposure corrected, low dynamic range: the -2 exposure was much too
>  light, the +2 exposure was too dark.

This is expected as the exposure optimization tries to bring the
brightness of all images to the one that is marked as the exposure
anchor.

> * No exposure correction, low dynamic range: everything was good.
>
> If I then enfused matching images with "no exposure correction", I got
> good results.  Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a way to get
> hugin to automate that.

If I understand you correctly, then there is a way, it's a bit
cumbersome though:
Anchor one image from one exposure set, say 0ev, for exposure in the
image tab. Use "Custom parameters below" in the exposure tab and mark
all images of the 0ev set and vignetting (probably unmark Camera
Response, I get flat images when using it). Optimize exposure. Do the
same for the +2ev stack und for the -2ev stack.

Hope this helps,
Felix

-- 
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] Photometric optimization aborted

2010-04-12 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi,

On 7 April 2010 21:09, Ryan Johnson  wrote:
>
> "Error: no overlapping points found. Photometric optimization aborted"
>
> Any ideas what to do? There was no difficulty adding control points (the
> horizon is plenty "interesting")

I do see the same error with my relatively recent (about 2 weeks old)
svn snapshot. It seems to occur everytime with a freshly started
project but goes away after saving the project, restarting hugin and
reloading the project. Unfortunately I haven't had the time to file a
bug or investigate the issue a bit more.

Regards,
Felix

-- 
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

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Day/night photo stack how-to

2010-03-23 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 22 March 2010 00:34, Bruno Postle  wrote:
> My panoramas tend to be shot with the camera in one hand and with a small
> child hanging on to the other.

Same here (and my wife standing a few meters farther away with an
expression on her face that says "You'd better be quick!!"). Doesn't
help the quality though: wrong focus, wrong exposure, missing images
to cover the sphere just to name a few typical flaws...

Felix

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [hugin-ptx] The lens database problem

2010-03-23 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 21 March 2010 11:58, Bruno Postle  wrote:
> So here is a bit of code as a test.  It needs Panotools::Script 0.24 and a
> couple of standard perl modules.
>
> What it does is to read a .pto project, find the first lens, gather some
> lens and EXIF data, and submits it via HTTP (currently to my home server,

Wow, that's an extremely interesting concept. Are you interested in
receiving submissions now? Should these only be high quality projects
(e.g. only with pano head not handheld)? There about 150 project files
on my harddisk waiting to be submitted.

> The difficult bit will be to write a tool that does something useful with
> this information.

As a first step it will be very interesting to look into the data and
look at the scatter of the correction curves that the submitted
parameters produce for one lens + camera combination. I'd be happy to
do that, unfortunately I just can't be sure when I will have the
necessary time available.

Felix

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Optimizer tab and X,Y,Z parameters

2010-03-23 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 17 March 2010 00:34, Bruno Postle  wrote:
>> The attached patch implements a "Everything (not x,y,z)" preset, which
>> does the job for me.
>
> Thanks, I committed it, but I fear that this preset menu is already very
> confusing.

Thanks for committing. I agree that the preset menu and probably the
whole Optimizer tab is confusing to inexperienced users.  I've been
trying to come up with a way to improve usability but I can't think of
a scheme that wouldn't make my own workflow cumbersome or even
impossible.

One approach would be to make the user decide early on in the process
whether he's working on a (i) linear, flat, mosaic (or whatever it's
called) panorama involving translation parameters or a (ii)
traditional one. For (i) automatically do optimization including
translation params and for (ii) activate them only for shots somehow
"tagged" as nadir shots.

But probably that's a usability nightmare as well and I'm pretty sure
that there will be people finding very valid and creative use cases
that involve both types in one project. Maybe we just have to accept
that hugin is an extremely powerful tool which can only lose part of
it's power if it's made "easy".

Felix

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
hugin-ptx+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

[hugin-ptx] Re: Optimizer tab and X,Y,Z parameters

2010-03-11 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 10 March 2010 23:42, Felix Hagemann  wrote:
> What would others think of a new preset like "Everything (without
> XYZ)" to make things a tad easier? Or maybe even add a new check box
> which toggles XYZ for all presets?

The attached patch implements a "Everything (not x,y,z)" preset, which
does the job for me.

Felix

-- 
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-ptxIndex: src/hugin1/hugin/xrc/optimize_panel.xrc
===
--- src/hugin1/hugin/xrc/optimize_panel.xrc	(revision 5059)
+++ src/hugin1/hugin/xrc/optimize_panel.xrc	(working copy)
@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
   Positions, Translation and Barrel (y,p,r,x,y,z,b)
   Positions, View and Barrel (y,p,r,v,b)
   Positions, Translation, View and Barrel (y,p,r,x,y,z,v,b)
+  Everything (not x,y,z)
   Everything
   the Custom parameters below
 
Index: src/hugin1/hugin/OptimizePanel.cpp
===
--- src/hugin1/hugin/OptimizePanel.cpp	(revision 5059)
+++ src/hugin1/hugin/OptimizePanel.cpp	(working copy)
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@
 
 // local optimize definition. need to be in sync with the xrc file
 enum OptimizeMode { OPT_PAIRWISE=0, OPT_YRP, OPT_YRP_XYZ, OPT_YRP_V, OPT_YRP_XYZ_V,
-OPT_YRP_B, OPT_YRP_XYZ_B, OPT_YRP_BV, OPT_YRP_XYZ_BV, OPT_ALL, OPT_CUSTOM,
+OPT_YRP_B, OPT_YRP_XYZ_B, OPT_YRP_BV, OPT_YRP_XYZ_BV, OPT_ALL_NOTXYZ, OPT_ALL, OPT_CUSTOM,
 OPT_END_MARKER};
 
 OptimizePanel::OptimizePanel()
@@ -901,11 +901,26 @@
   SetCheckMark(m_d_list,false);
   SetCheckMark(m_e_list,false);
   break;
-  	case OPT_ALL:
+  	case OPT_ALL_NOTXYZ:
   // everything
   SetCheckMark(m_yaw_list,true);
   SetCheckMark(m_roll_list,true);
   SetCheckMark(m_pitch_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_x_list,false);
+  SetCheckMark(m_y_list,false);
+  SetCheckMark(m_z_list,false);
+  SetCheckMark(m_v_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_a_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_b_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_c_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_d_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_e_list,true);
+	  break;
+	case OPT_ALL:
+  // everything
+  SetCheckMark(m_yaw_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_roll_list,true);
+  SetCheckMark(m_pitch_list,true);
   SetCheckMark(m_x_list,true);
   SetCheckMark(m_y_list,true);
   SetCheckMark(m_z_list,true);

[hugin-ptx] Optimizer tab and X,Y,Z parameters

2010-03-10 Thread Felix Hagemann 
Hi all,

Due to the addition of the X,Y,Z parameters to the Optimizer tab and
their addition to the preset drop-down I found myself often optimizing
X,Y,Z without wanting to (out of habit used "Everything") . If I want
the old "Everything" without X,Y,Z I need to select "Positions, View
and Barrel (y,p,r,v,b)", then select "the Custom parameters below" and
check "a,c,d,e" manually, which is quite cumbersome.

What would others think of a new preset like "Everything (without
XYZ)" to make things a tad easier? Or maybe even add a new check box
which toggles XYZ for all presets?

Cheers,
Felix

-- 
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] [win32] Hugin 2010.1 svn5031: autopano-sift-c finds VERY few keypoints

2010-03-01 Thread Felix Hagemann 
On 1 March 2010 14:44, Bruno Postle  wrote:
>
> You need to be using the 2.5.1 release or a recent snapshot (which
> should be fixed but I haven't heard any reports of success or failure
> yet).

Just to contribute one data point:
Using a snapshot from yesterday's trunk with fisheye images (5D +
Sigma 8mm, HFOV about 190 degrees, 4 images around with large overlap)
was giving a fairly large number of control points with acceptable
spread. So whatever issue was occuring, I haven't seen it.

Felix

-- 
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

[hugin-ptx] Re: segmentation fault when stitching

2009-01-12 Thread Felix Hagemann 

2009/1/12 Lukáš Jirkovský :
> Fortunately someone did more testing on the gcc side
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38625) and the cause was
> found. I'm attaching small patch to configure.in against newest cvs
> which adds necessary flag to CXXFLAGS when compiler is GCC.
> Can someone test it? It's still a little bit hackish, but it works for me.

Works for me. A test case that was segfaulting reproducibly when
compiling without debugging symbols now completes. And four to fives
times faster as well, finallz  making pano stitching and blending fun
again!

Thanks for sorting this out,
Felix

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---