HELP...! Weird nadir color from Hugin 0.8.0
mh
Since I started using Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard, I am getting
very weird nadirs out of Hugin.
I use only the images for the shots around to stitch a panorama.
When I am satisfied, I add the nadir shot, add control points and
optimize for the nadir shot only to get the nadir patch. It was
working quite OK in version 0.7.0 but in version 0.8.0 I get very
weird colors for the nadir part.
The last try resulted in a completely destroyed nadir, I cannot see
what is wrong.
I have uploaded the Hugin project and the resulted images here:
https://www.bredbandsbolaget.se/utdelat/b530695/images/
Could anyone please tell what is going wrong?
Many thanks,
Mahmood
Bruno Postle
>
>Since I started using Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard, I am getting
>very weird nadirs out of Hugin.
>I use only the images for the shots around to stitch a panorama.
>When I am satisfied, I add the nadir shot, add control points and
>optimize for the nadir shot only to get the nadir patch. It was
>working quite OK in version 0.7.0 but in version 0.8.0 I get very
>weird colors for the nadir part.
>The last try resulted in a completely destroyed nadir, I cannot see
>what is wrong.
The reason why the nadir is white is because it has a different EV
value to the rest of the images, presumably because exposure
correction went wrong. Exposure correction will go badly wrong if
the images are not well aligned in the first place.
Looking at the project, the nadir also has wildly improbable values
for lens distortion which seems to be because it has been given a
different lens number and had all parameters optimised - Did hugin
give it a different number or were you trying to do something with
this shot?
--
Bruno
Mahmood H
Thanks for the reply.
I did not try anything special but from what you say:
> correction went wrong. Exposure correction will go badly wrong if
> the images are not well aligned in the first place.
>
but I put the nadir shot in landscape orientation???
About the lens parameters, at one point after the optimization I got
very strange warped image, then I checked the cropping and discovered
nadir cropping being out of the image.
So, I tried to fix the crop by seeting the crop values manually, but I
never succeeded to fix it as I wanted. Could it have any impact on the
lens params?
Bruno Postle
>
>> correction went wrong. Exposure correction will go badly wrong if
>> the images are not well aligned in the first place.
>
>Could it be because all the other images are in portrait orientation
>but I put the nadir shot in landscape orientation???
Ah yes, by rotating the nadir image it gets a different 'lens
number', this means that lens parameters can't be linked with the
rest of the photos and end-up being optimised separately. In this
case there was not enough information to successfully optimise
'both' lenses.
>About the lens parameters, at one point after the optimization I got
>very strange warped image, then I checked the cropping and discovered
>nadir cropping being out of the image.
>So, I tried to fix the crop by seeting the crop values manually, but I
>never succeeded to fix it as I wanted. Could it have any impact on the
>lens params?
No, in Hugin the crop is entirely a mask that is applied to the
input photo, i.e. it just controls which parts of the image are
treated as transparent and doesn't relate to field of view or
distortion parameters.
--
Bruno
Mahmood H
Such a small thing has caused me so much trouble and now it's away.
There are other stuff that has annoyed me but I have gone around the
problems but now I think maybe those are also small things that can be
helped by simple tips.
One is the use of smartblend instead of enblend. When I I tick the
option "Use alternative Enblend program" and choose smartblend.exe to
be used, the warped images are not blended at all. In cases I prefer
smartblend, I open enblend GUI program and use smartblend that way to
get the images blended.
Is there anything that I have missed there too?
Another thing is the auto generation of CPs. I've never succeeded to
get hugin do that for me, I either select all point manually or run
autopano.sift separately, the use its output in hugin, and add some
more point in upper and lower parts of the images and remove the CPs
from moving objects.
If I manually go and select autopano in the hugin settings, then it's
run from inside hugin just that time, but the next time it does not
work. Autopano-sift has never worked from inside hugin for me :(
Thanks again,
Mahmood
Bruno Postle
>
>One is the use of smartblend instead of enblend. When I I tick the
>option "Use alternative Enblend program" and choose smartblend.exe to
>be used, the warped images are not blended at all. In cases I prefer
>smartblend, I open enblend GUI program and use smartblend that way to
>get the images blended.
Sorry, maybe someone else can help as I've never used smartblend in
Hugin?
>Another thing is the auto generation of CPs. I've never succeeded to
>get hugin do that for me, I either select all point manually or run
>autopano.sift separately, the use its output in hugin, and add some
>more point in upper and lower parts of the images and remove the CPs
>from moving objects.
Assuming that you are using Windows, I understand that the current
default of autopano-sift-C more-or-less works. What version of
Hugin are you using and where did you get it?
--
Bruno
Lukáš Jirkovský
> On Sun 27-Sep-2009 at 12:53 -0700, Mahmood H wrote:
>>
>>One is the use of smartblend instead of enblend. When I I tick the
>>option "Use alternative Enblend program" and choose smartblend.exe to
>>be used, the warped images are not blended at all. In cases I prefer
>>smartblend, I open enblend GUI program and use smartblend that way to
>>get the images blended.
>
> Sorry, maybe someone else can help as I've never used smartblend in
> Hugin?
enblend specific options to blender. So you have to get rid of these
options first. It smuch simpler that it may sound, only thing you have
to do is to use some wrapper which removes these options. Fortunately
there's one in hugin repository.
See readme:
http://hugin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/hugin/hugin/trunk/platforms/windows/smartblend-wrapper/smartblend-hugin-windows-readme.txt?revision=3490&view=markup
And the wrapper itself:
http://hugin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/hugin/hugin/trunk/platforms/windows/smartblend-wrapper/smartblend-hugin.bat?revision=3579&view=markup
>
>>Another thing is the auto generation of CPs. I've never succeeded to
>>get hugin do that for me, I either select all point manually or run
>>autopano.sift separately, the use its output in hugin, and add some
>>more point in upper and lower parts of the images and remove the CPs
>>from moving objects.
>
> Assuming that you are using Windows, I understand that the current
> default of autopano-sift-C more-or-less works. What version of
> Hugin are you using and where did you get it?
>
> --
> Bruno
>
> >
>
Mahmood H
I use Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard on Windows (Vista).
There is another issue as well that is not directly a problem but a
pecularity that I need to understand and that is the size of the final
pano pano.
When I import my images to hugin and optimize, among the last steps in
the stitcher tab is the size of the output.
(I use Nikon D700 + Nikkor 10.5).
The strange thing number 1 is that I get different max size alsmost
every time, not a huge difference but something between say 7600x3800
to 8200x4100.
That is one thing.
The other strange (number 2) thing is whatever size I get, it
increases when I add the nadir shot and optimize again. so e.g.
7800x3900 with the 4 shots around but with 4 shots- 1nadir I get
8400x4200.
Regards,
Mahmood
Mahmood H
This will help a lot, I will test it very soon.
Regards,
Mahmood
On 28 Sep, 08:57, Lukáš Jirkovský <l.jirkov...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/9/27 Bruno Postle <br...@postle.net>:
>
>
>
> > On Sun 27-Sep-2009 at 12:53 -0700, Mahmood H wrote:
>
> >>One is the use of smartblend instead of enblend. When I I tick the
> >>option "Use alternative Enblend program" and choose smartblend.exe to
> >>be used, the warped images are not blended at all. In cases I prefer
> >>smartblend, I open enblend GUI program and use smartblend that way to
> >>get the images blended.
>
> > Sorry, maybe someone else can help as I've never used smartblend in
> > Hugin?
>
> I guess that the you have the problem because hugin passes some
> enblend specific options to blender. So you have to get rid of these
> options first. It smuch simpler that it may sound, only thing you have
> to do is to use some wrapper which removes these options. Fortunately
> there's one in hugin repository.
>
> And the wrapper itself:http://hugin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/hugin/hugin/trunk/platforms/w...
Mahmood H
I use Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard on Windows (Vista).
There is another issue as well that is not directly a problem but a
final
When I import my images to hugin and optimize, among the last steps
in
the stitcher tab is the size of the output.
(I use Nikon D700 + Nikkor 10.5).
(optimal size) almost
every time (I mean for different panos but with the same camera/lens),
to 8200x4100.
That is one thing.
Bruno Postle
>
>I use Hugin Version 0.8.0.4008Allard on Windows (Vista).
>If I remember right I think I downloaded it from SourceForge.
It should be ok, I would try resetting the 'Autopano' preferences to
the default.
>(1) The strange thing (number 1) is that I get different max size
>(optimal size) almost every time (I mean for different panos but
>with the same camera/lens), not a huge difference but something
>between say 7600x3800 to 8200x4100.
I've noticed this too, but since the number is always about right, I
have never investigated the reason.
--
Bruno
David Haberthür
>(1) The strange thing (number 1) is that I get different max sizeI've noticed this too, but since the number is always about right, I
>(optimal size) almost every time (I mean for different panos but
>with the same camera/lens), not a huge difference but something
>between say 7600x3800 to 8200x4100.
have never investigated the reason.
Sorry to sound dumb, but does this not depend on the overlap between the pictures. So I would be surprised if you get the same optimal size for any of two different panoramas, since the overlap is almost all the time a little bit different. Or do you always shoot with a tripod and a stepper plate, so that each and every panorama should be exactly the same?
Habi
Bruno Postle
>
>>>(1) The strange thing (number 1) is that I get different max size
>>>(optimal size) almost every time (I mean for different panos but
>>>with the same camera/lens), not a huge difference but something
>>>between say 7600x3800 to 8200x4100.
>Sorry to sound dumb, but does this not depend on the overlap between the
>pictures. So I would be surprised if you get the same optimal size for any
>of two different panoramas, since the overlap is almost all the time a
>little bit different.
Only for partial panoramas, for a 360° panorama the 'optimal size'
should be entirely a function of the input photo parameters. So if
you load your lens settings then you should always get the same size
panorama.
--
Bruno