john, thank you for your reply.
--- In #removed#, "John Houghton" <j.houghton@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In #removed#, "pedro_silva58"
> <pedro_silva58@> wrote:
> >
> > sorry for being so late to join the party, but i don't understand
> > the purpose of one cp per seam. what parameters did you optimize,
> > and why?
>
> I was merely making the point that by intelligent optimization and
> making use of parameter values already known (applied by a template),
> you can manage with far fewer control points than is the case if you
> expect PTGui to evaluate everything automatically from scratch.
your general point had been understood.
My
> example was an extreme case, showing that only one point per seam
> actually enabled a perfectly good stitch to be performed. I already
> knew the lens parameters (from calibration) and approximate yaw
> values, and I knew that the pitch of all 4 images was the same and
> the roll was also the same (since a spherical pano head was used).
> So I optimised fov, yaw (of 3 images) together with linked pitch and
> roll of all 4 images.
again, i (think i) understand the general point. what i don't really
understand is why -- since you knew the lens parameters (from
calibration) -- you felt you needed to optimize fov (and not, say, d
and e[*]). i can't help wondering whether the custom fov from 4 cps
is really better than a previously carefully determined one. i
suppose i could try myself, but i don't have a pano head i can trust
for that. finally, i might have expected a champion of t1 points to
use them to optimize pitch and roll, rather than a single cp between
image pairs (maybe the appropriate features were missing?).
> Of course I am not suggesting that you would
> use only one point per seam in a general workflow.
yes, of course not!
please understand that i'm not (and was never) challenging you, or
anything of the sort. i have the greatest respect for your skills, as
a photographer and panographer, as well as teacher. i would not have
dared to optimize pretty much anything with so few cps, but was hoping
i'd learn yet something else from you.
[*] i think that whenever i suspend my camera from a long lens there
is enough play in the mounts that i can't trust the shifts to remain
unchanged. i'd not be surprised if the same thing happened with a
fisheye, only less obvious.
again, i appreciate your taking the time to reply.
cheers,
pedro
------------------------------------
--
<*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
<*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
<*> Nabble (Web) http://www.nabble.com/PanoToolsNG-f15658.html
<*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
<*> Moderators/List Admins: #removed#
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:#removed#
mailto:#removed#
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
#removed#
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message:
Previous message:
