this thread: "hugin has become unusable for me" helps enormously

[Mike Maas]

I found a thread that answers most of my questions: hugin has become unusable for me.  

thanks,

Mike

[Stefan Peter]

Dear Mike Maas

On 05.12.2016 19:19, Mike Maas wrote:
> I found a thread that answers most of my questions: hugin has become
> unusable for me.

This thread is from 2011. How can it be relevant in 2016? Are you still
on Hugin 2011.*.*?


With kind regards

Stefan Peter

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style for details)

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Monday, 5 December 2016 at 10:19:09 -0800, Mike Maas wrote:
> I found a thread that answers most of my questions: hugin has become
> unusable for me.

This complete lack of context doesn't answer any questions for me: it
just presents new ones. What are you referring to?

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger gr...@FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program
reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA

[Mike Maas]

Because of the moderation there were 3 related messages posted in sequence each of which apparently went into their own thread since while awaiting moderation there was no thread to respond to.

The initial question was as to whether or not there is a way to globally turn off photometrics in order to simply stitch the images without changing wb or exp. 

The answer, as far as I can tell is no.  

However the thread I referenced went into great detail about how to change wb and exposure and why they don't always behave as one expects.  That information was sufficient for me to find a way to do what I was looking for in terms of turning off wb and exp corrections for a single stitch.  

I do think that a global switch to turn off all photometric changes runtime rather than image by image would be useful but it apparently does not exist.

I am happy with and can work with the features as they currently exist now that I know how to do so.

HTH the confusion engendered by multiple unthreaded msgs on the same topic to the moderation issue.

Mike 

[Carl von Einem]

I can see no moderation issue here. Just an impatient new member.

We don't need a real moderation for this very relaxed list. Only when
new group members write a first message to the list (or someone uses a
new email address instead of the one already used) those message(s) are
queued for approval by one of the moderators. So one of them (either
Bruno or me) makes sure that no spammer or harvester makes it through to
the list members. As soon as we check our emails.

All that we ask from a new list member is a little bit of patience and a
good description of the problem so someone can answer the questions.

fyi: moderation of this mailing list is not a paid job (and I guess you
don't pay for the service).

Please try to focus on one thread for this topic, three threads are a
little bit distracting. And please don't use the subject line to write a
longish story, thanks.

Carl

Mike Maas wrote on 06.12.16 00:27:

[Mike Maas]

Carl,

First, thanks for your help serving as a moderator.

Could a single thread been made out of the 3 obviously related posts, the third of which basically says the issue has been resolved or does the software force you to create a separate thread for each moderated post? 

I do find it a bit ironic that the main reason for the third post was to alleviate the need for a response to the first post thereby lessening the load rather than increasing it as has happened due to the creating of three threads where one would have been sufficient and clearer.

Mike