gmane.comp.misc.ptx

Re: Inverted cone view

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T21:25:43

I used Hugin and stitched using Equirectangular - not Cylindrical.

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 2:23:46 PM UTC-7, ecs1749 wrote:

Re: Inverted cone view

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T21:23:46

In Hugin, I clicked "Calculate" and it gave me the values of HFOV 360 and 
VFOV of 180.

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 11:20:29 AM UTC-7, Luís Henrique Camargo Quiroz 
wrote:

Re: best overlap % in unique situation

Erik Krause — 2012-05-24T19:05:28

Am 24.05.2012 17:07, schrieb LiteBright:

Just the opposite: You should go for a large overlap in order to 
minimize parallax errors. You will have to go through all image pairs 
and delete control points on nearby objects manually. If there is more 
background than near foreground there is a chance that enblend (or 
better smartblend) will blend around the parallax errors if there is 
enough overlap. If not you need to blend manually f.e. using masks. The 
larger your overlap, the larger the chance that a nearby object is 
completely covered in one image and hence won't cause a visible error.

Re: Inverted cone view

Erik Krause — 2012-05-24T18:56:56

Am 24.05.2012 16:14, schrieb ecs1749:

Both are displayed wrong. Both don't cover 180° vertical field of view. 
The first one is stretched to the nadir, the second is stretched to both 
nadir and zenith. Your source images apparently are cylindrical ones. 
Just check "Cylindrical"on Pano2QTVR Project tab (IIRC - it's some years 
now since I used it last...).

Re: Inverted cone view

Luís Henrique Camargo Quiroz — 2012-05-24T18:20:29

  Hi ecs1749!

   Have you checked the vfov (vertical field of view) of the image? Perhaps
the interactive viewer is set with a wrong value.

  Luís Henrique


2012/5/24 Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) <cartoleba< at >gmail.com>

Re: Inverted cone view

Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola — 2012-05-24T17:27:59

Have you tried one of those viewers to see the jpg directly?

Cheers,

Carlos E G Carvalho (Cartola)
http://cartola.org/360
http://cartola.org/panoforum



2012/5/24 ecs1749 <ecs1749< at >gmail.com>

Re: Inverted cone view

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T15:38:16

I wonder if this is caused by missing nadir...but shouldn't that be just a 
patch of black area?

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 7:14:32 AM UTC-7, ecs1749 wrote:

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

Bruno Postle — 2012-05-24T15:24:48

Just lack of time, since flickr is quicker. I should move it to the
wiki but need to find the time. There are one or two other
mini-tutorials that ought to be transferred: one on editing panoramas
with panomatic and another on stitching a street elevation with the
mosaic functionality.

best overlap % in unique situation

LiteBright — 2012-05-24T15:07:12

I must take pictures to be stitched where the camera's entrance pupil
is separated 3.5" for each picture.  There is no motion, the camera is
mounted vertically on flat plane with a 37.5mm lens, and the closest
objects in the picture will be greater than 25' away.

Because of the difference in perspective caused by the 3.5", the
amount of overlap will be different for near objects than it is for
far objects.  (see picture below)
http://g1.img-dpreview.com/B3DA06C5058F4C39A8BB142EA5084D99.jpg

Of course, minimizing possible parallax errors becomes the biggest
concern.  Since far objects will suffer from the biggest difference in
perspective, it seems that it may be best to have the smallest overlap
% possible that hugin will still be able to create control points
for???   Maybe 15% overlap of "near objects" (20' away)?

Any thoughts or comments are appreciated.

Inverted cone view

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T14:14:32

For some unknown reason, after correcting a number of issues, the Quicktime 
VR movie I created becomes like an inverted cone view (imagine standing at 
the bottom of an inverted cone looking up):

http://www.powersystemadvisors.com/cheungs/Panorama/DSC_0100-DSC_0177Final_fused800.mov

as oppose to the far more pleasant street view:

http://www.powersystemadvisors.com/cheungs/Panorama/DSC_0100-DSC_0114-1.mov

I have no clue what I did to cause this. The jpg was created by using 
Hugin, and the Quicktime conversion was created using Pano2QTVR.  The jpeg 
appears to be normal:

http://www.powersystemadvisors.com/cheungs/Panorama/DSC_0100-DSC_0177Final_fused.jpg

So, I am assuming I selected something when stitching that caused this. 
 Anybody?

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola — 2012-05-24T13:01:51

2012/5/23 Markku Kolkka <markku.kolkka< at >iki.fi>


Another option is to use the clone tool on gimp or PS.

Another one is to make a selection, feather it (on GIMP -
Selection/Feather) copy and paste over the black place.

I did some videos here using gimp to solve some minor problems on panoramic
images:

http://cartola.org/fotos/index-201010.php?dir=Tutoriais/Fotos360/GIMP-Removendo_Parallax

They don't have the quality I wish, but I guess they can illustrate some
possibilities. Sorry also for my English and maybe the link won't be the
best.

Cheers,

Carlos E G Carvalho (Cartola)
http://cartola.org/360
http://cartola.org/panoforum

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola — 2012-05-24T12:54:12

2012/5/24 Greg 'groggy' Lehey <groogled< at >gmail.com>



Hi Greg, you can go to the Fast Preview Panorama window and choose the
Move/Drag tab. There you can drag the new image to the place you want. With
other mouse buttons you can rotate. I think that is the easier way to do
that.

Cheers,

Carlos E G Carvalho (Cartola)
http://cartola.org/360
http://cartola.org/panoforum

Re: Windows build with lensfun and plugin interface

brian_ims — 2012-05-24T11:40:54

Hi,

I uploaded again to a different server:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/81261333/Hugin%202011.5.0.4f5f884bb728.rar

Its a 32 bit version

Cheers
Brian

(apologies Kai for changing your name)

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

kfj — 2012-05-24T10:28:03

You can fill in any old thing. I've sometimes even just filled in
gradients, or put in bits of images with false lens parameters to
stretch them. This kind of cheat is particularly good for zenith and
nadir. The only problem I sometimes get is that if the patch is too
different from the place where it's put, enblend fails to find a seam.

The images don't all move together when you drag them in 'standard'
mode, but I found a trick: if you move in 'standard, single images' or
whatever it's called in english, and then check all images, you can
move them together even if they aren't linked with CPs. And just
moving the whole panorama by entering yaw, pitch or roll values at the
top of the preview window also moves all images.

Kay

Re: Regenerate controls points automatically from the control points window

kfj — 2012-05-24T10:16:21


On 24 Mai, 00:11, Bruno Postle <br...< at >postle.net> wrote:

I'd say it is very much what ecs1749 wants. Maybe it would help new
users if the 'create control points' button in the images tab said on
or next to the button that it will create CPs for the *selected*
images only if there is s selection. It says so in the context help
which pops up when you hover over the button, but who ever hovers
there? I suppose noone suspects this finer point, and it had to be
explained here several times already. There is plenty of empty space
near the button, why not filll it?

But a shortcut to run the CPG on the two images currently displayed in
the CP tab would be a nice addition as well, and there's space in that
tab, as well.

Kay

Re: Lens calibration for RAW with a JPEG reference

Marie-Noëlle Augendre — 2012-05-24T09:05:23

2012/5/21 Bruno Postle <bruno< at >postle.net>



Thanks for your answers. I hadn't realized it involved a the stitching of
several panoramas (one for each focal lens, I guess). I'm afraid I've nor
time neither ability enough to do this at the moment; the Powershot S100 is
only a 'notebook' camera for me, and I might wait for someone more
knowledgeable on the matter to do this calibration (will stick to the JPEG
in the meantime).

Marie-Noëlle

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

Frederic Da Vitoria — 2012-05-24T08:54:29

There is a Windows plugin link lower in the page, search for "There is a
Windows version". I tested, it works with Gimp 2.8. Well, at least it does
not hang. But I guess finding how to use it may take some time as there
does not seem to be any documentation...

2012/5/24 ecs1749 <ecs1749< at >gmail.com>

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

Greg 'groggy' Lehey — 2012-05-24T06:33:50

Interesting.  That's very helpful.  I didn't know you could add an
image more than once.  I've tried this on some problem panoramas that
I have been working on, and it works well.  Is there a reason why you
put this on Flickr rather than on the panotools Wiki?

I had difficultly with a few points, in particular how to get the
images where you want.  Clearly you can't attach any control points,
because the areas don't match.  Here's what I did:

1.  Load all the images once and create control points normally.
2.  Mask out the areas I didn't want.
3.  Locate an image with a similar area and load it.  Mask out the
    parts of that image that I didn't want.
4.  In the Images tab, select the image and set yaw to an appropriate
    value, mainly trial and error.

That worked.  My results, both before and after, are at
http://www.lemis.com/grog/photos/Photos.php?dirdate=20120510 There are
two views here.  RCC-1.orig is stitched with no correction, RCC-1-1
was an attempt with GIMP, and RCC-1-2 is filled according to your
method.  The same goes for RCC-2, RCC-2-1 and RCC-2-2.  You'll note
that in this case I was able to get rid of the tripod shadow too.

A couple of problems: the Move/Drag functionality in the fast panorama
preview doesn't move the additional images, so it seems that you need
to move things into place first.  Also reloading the .pto files puts
the additional images in different places.

So, my question: is this the correct way of doing it?  Or is there an
easier way?

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer
Finger grog< at >FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua

Re: Why doesn't Hugin create control points vertically (it seems)?

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T05:48:53

Ok, that does work better.  Thanks.

On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:11:58 PM UTC-7, Bruno Postle wrote:

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T03:42:46

I got it.  I see what you did there.

On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 5:23:41 PM UTC-7, ecs1749 wrote:

Re: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?

ecs1749 — 2012-05-24T00:23:41

What does it mean by using Mask to fill-it?

On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:11:43 PM UTC-7, Bruno Postle wrote: