Question about layer order and shooting the sky

[Jesse Kennedy]

Hello Hugin users,

I've been using the software for a couple months, and I really like it. Thanks to the developers for creating an awesome project that's still relevant many years later. I have a question about how you guys handle blank space with nothing to create control points on when shooting your panoramas. It becomes an issue shooting 360 deg. shots that include the sky and gets worse when using a high focal length lens. I've learned that I can do a second pass of the sky with a wider angle lens in order to fill in any missing pixels, albeit at a lower resolution. Content-aware fill also does a relatively good job of filling in clear, blue sky. 

Which brings me to my next question. Now that I have overlapping shots, how can I make sure Hugin only uses the lower quality, wide angle shots only to fill in pixels not covered by the better lens? From what I understand, I should just need to place them at the end of the image list. Is it possible that Hugin would overlay more than what it needs to? 

I've been looking at the --visualize output, it's hard to see how much of the image is used. I know there's an option to write the intermediate output panorama, but it overwrites the image each time. I might write a script to copy it every time it changes to see a timeline of how it's pieced together. 

Lastly, for those of you that shoot with a panoramic head, do you rotate it the same amount for each vertical angle? How much overlap do you go for? I've been using 1/2-1/3.

Also, does anyone have experience compiling BigTIFF support in Linux? 2 GB is so tiny for a 360 panorama.

Thanks,

Jesse

[dkloi]

On Sunday, 22 October 2017 08:51:10 UTC+1, Jesse Kennedy wrote:

Hello Hugin users,

I've been using the software for a couple months, and I really like it. Thanks to the developers for creating an awesome project that's still relevant many years later. I have a question about how you guys handle blank space with nothing to create control points on when shooting your panoramas. It becomes an issue shooting 360 deg. shots that include the sky and gets worse when using a high focal length lens. I've learned that I can do a second pass of the sky with a wider angle lens in order to fill in any missing pixels, albeit at a lower resolution. Content-aware fill also does a relatively good job of filling in clear, blue sky. 

I sometimes just manually position sky shots that have no detail. If you shoot using a regular pattern, then you could use the known shooting positions to enter in the relevant angles.

 

Which brings me to my next question. Now that I have overlapping shots, how can I make sure Hugin only uses the lower quality, wide angle shots only to fill in pixels not covered by the better lens? From what I understand, I should just need to place them at the end of the image list. Is it possible that Hugin would overlay more than what it needs to? 

To make sure the wide angle shots don't contribute to bits of the output where you don't want it to, just mask those regions out.

 

Lastly, for those of you that shoot with a panoramic head, do you rotate it the same amount for each vertical angle? How much overlap do you go for? I've been using 1/2-1/3.

It depends on the panorama. If there's lots of detail, then I can get away with quite a small overlap region, say 1/4 or even less. If there are fewer likely control points, then I'd shoot as much overlap to get a good set of control point pairs. If you're using a moderate wide angle or longer lens, I've found you don't need that many control point pairs per overlapping image pairs to get a good stitch (as long as your panohead is set up correctly and the scenery isn't moving).

[T. Modes]

Hi

Am Sonntag, 22. Oktober 2017 22:11:54 UTC+2 schrieb dkloi:

On Sunday, 22 October 2017 08:51:10 UTC+1, Jesse Kennedy wrote:

I have a question about how you guys handle blank space with nothing to create control points on when shooting your panoramas. It becomes an issue shooting 360 deg. shots that include the sky and gets worse when using a high focal length lens. I've learned that I can do a second pass of the sky with a wider angle lens in order to fill in any missing pixels, albeit at a lower resolution. Content-aware fill also does a relatively good job of filling in clear, blue sky. 

I sometimes just manually position sky shots that have no detail. If you shoot using a regular pattern, then you could use the known shooting positions to enter in the relevant angles.

For this use case there is also the geocpset tool: see https://wiki.panotools.org/Geocpset