On 1/31/22 11:41, johnfi...@gmail.com wrote:
> The most important use case for this idea would also depend on support for
> low priority control
> points, which IIUC is in a fork of Hugin that I haven't had time to look at
> yet.
>
> Assume that control points are very accurately placed, but
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 at 12:53, johnfine2017 wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:56:17 AM UTC-5 bruno...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> The remapping and stitching is performed as usual by the Hugin toolchain,
>> ptomorph just manipulates the input images a bit to make them stitch better.
>>
>
> By
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:56:17 AM UTC-5 bruno...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> The remapping and stitching is performed as usual by the Hugin toolchain,
> ptomorph just manipulates the input images a bit to make them stitch better.
>
By "input" do you mean original? I can't imagine how that
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 at 22:42, johnfi...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 5:06:20 PM UTC-5 bruno...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> See the ptomorph proof of concept from ten(!) years ago here:
>> https://groups.google.com/g/hugin-ptx/c/UripOuuYXCQ?pli=1
>>
>> This works incredibly well,
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 5:06:20 PM UTC-5 bruno...@gmail.com wrote:
> See the ptomorph proof of concept from ten(!) years ago here:
> https://groups.google.com/g/hugin-ptx/c/UripOuuYXCQ?pli=1
>
> This works incredibly well, with no need for low-priority control
> points, but I never
See the ptomorph proof of concept from ten(!) years ago here:
https://groups.google.com/g/hugin-ptx/c/UripOuuYXCQ?pli=1
This works incredibly well, with no need for low-priority control
points, but I never pursued it, and it needs some thought regarding
getting it to work with more than two
The most important use case for this idea would also depend on support for
low priority control points, which IIUC is in a fork of Hugin that I
haven't had time to look at yet.
Assume that control points are very accurately placed, but still don't
optimize very well. So the remapped images
