gmane.comp.misc.ptx

Re: Move/Drag and Control Points

Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola — 2012-05-25T21:35:46

No, but it uses control points. If the image you are dragging is connected,
the others will go together. To fill the sky with the extra images don't
make any control points on it before dragging.

Cheers,

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



2012/5/25 Jan Martin <janmartin< at >diy-streetview.org>

Re: Move/Drag and Control Points

Jan Martin — 2012-05-25T20:00:37

No.


On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:59 PM, ecs1749 <ecs1749< at >gmail.com> wrote:

Move/Drag and Control Points

ecs1749 — 2012-05-25T19:59:19

Does Move/Drag on the Hugin Fast Review window has any effect on Control 
Points?

Re: Windows build with lensfun and plugin interface

kfj — 2012-05-25T14:53:17


Did that as well. I had to install Python to run hugin. I had hoped
the mechanism that the python interface only activates if it's used
would make it possible to run hugin without even having python
installed, but, at least with this build, it doesn't work that way -
if python isn't there, hugin won't start. It might be enough to have
the relevant python DLL in the right place, but I didn't check that.

Once python was there, all seemed fine at first. I couldn't open TIFF
files, though, only JPEG. Anyway, with a project with JPEGs, I could
run the simple plugins. I couldn't get to run woa as a plugin, it
would crash in ntdll.dll - might just be the w7 install I tested on.

But I got to run woa on the command line, after installing libtiff and
setting the path to that tiffdump in woa explicitly (when trying to
run the tiffdump in the hugin package, it would complain that it
couldn't find zlib1.dll).

Never mind all that, I think all of these problems can easily be dealt
with by a competent windows person (w

Re: Tutorials on wiki (was: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?)

Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola — 2012-05-25T12:39:37

Hi Greg,

first, thank you for the tutorial. I have already shown Bruno's before to
some people, now there is one more option.

I found a little strange your hands used to cover the sun. I might suggest
that you do many different expositions and combine them to make the sun and
the rest of the scene look ok. I am still getting better on doing this and
surely Magic Lantern is making this job easier, but I think it is possible
to do it manually also. Here is an example:

http://cartola.org/panoramas/20120401-Fiocruz_Tour_Castelo/

where I have used enfuse to combine 5 JPGs with 2EV of exposition
difference between each one. In this case it would be very difficult to
remove the sun in the middle of the trees.

In this other case:

http://www.cartola.org/panoramas/20110723-Carolina-Torre_Lua-3/

I did the same using 3 exposures made with the AEB from the camera - no
Magic Lantern. And it is also possible to do with an only raw file. In this
case I suggest you make darker pictures to make them brighter manipulati

Re: Windows build with lensfun and plugin interface

kfj — 2012-05-25T11:37:31


First test on Windows XP:
- unpacked archive
- launched hugin
- works (tested woa, ran okay. compliments!)
- launched python session
- imported hsi
- fine as well.

good job :)

Next thing I'll try is on a pretty minimal win 7 install.

Kay

Re: Windows build with lensfun and plugin interface

kfj — 2012-05-25T09:59:13


downloads fine now. Will report once I've installed it.


No, you were right and Henk got it wrong. I am indeed Kay, with a 'y'.

The same.

Re: Inverted cone view

ecs1749 — 2012-05-25T08:58:53

Thanks.  That is indeed the problem.  Dealing with the sky continues to be 
a headache.

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 5:18:50 PM UTC-7, RizThon wrote:

Tutorials on wiki (was: Is there an easier way to deal with the sky?)

Greg 'groggy' Lehey — 2012-05-25T02:26:09

If you're interested, I have a much more detailed description in my
diary (http://www.lemis.com/grog/diary-may2012.php#hugin-retouching)
which I could turn into a tutorial on the wiki.  Comments (and
corrections!) welcome.

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: Inverted cone view

RizThon — 2012-05-25T00:18:50

You're image is obviously not a 360x180, you're missing both zenith
and nadir. If you give this image to PanoCube, it will simply tell you
that the ratio is incorrect (should be 2x1).
Just add data up and down so that you have the correct ratio (usually
if I'm missing some sky I just choose some blue for the top, and
usually some dark colour for the bottom). Then run again PanoCube or
Pano2QTVR.

2012/5/25 ecs1749 <ecs1749< at >gmail.com>:

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

Erik Krause — 2012-05-24T21:35:04

Am 24.05.2012 17:24, schrieb Bruno Postle:

For the time being you could add a link in the tutorials list on the wiki...

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?