teddy wrote:

Hi,

Here is my photos:
https://dl.transfer.ro/transfer_ro-13nov-f82a921a83.zip

I must see dca out using AUTOPANO GIGA 2.6 can make a panoramic image which then converts to a virtual tour.

Until now AUTOPANO 2.6 GIGA made ​​me not only a horrible view.
Doing something wrong with this AUTOPANO 2.6 GIGA

If it is anybody that know to use the UTOPANO 2.6 GIGA please make me a panorama .jpg,  with watermark, and give me a link for file, to tell if it's worth buying this software.

PTGUI or AUTOPANO GIGA 2.6: which is better?

besides of some kind of introducing yourself when you start into a forum it would be wise to provide some information about how you
shot the pano. Camera, lens, rig/setup and so on.

Without that kind of information we can only guess . . . .

Klaus

Hi Teddy,

lumelix wrote:

teddy wrote:

If it is anybody that know to use the UTOPANO 2.6 GIGA please make me a panorama .jpg,  with watermark, and give me a link for file, to tell if it's worth buying this software.

Hi

It only needs some seconds to get the stitching result below with Autopano Giga.
But it looks like there are several faults with your images:
- Tilt the horizontal images 15º, so there is sometimes very small overlap and not enough image information.
- Different ISO- and exposure times, not easy to blend perfectly
- Open aperture at f2.8. Even with a fisheye, f4 or f5.6 is better
- Fill flash light in some images, not easy to blend perfectly
- No Nodal adapter ? No perfect stitch of the tiles on the floor possible
- 2 nadir images with the same frame

So even with a very powerfull software like Autopano Giga, you will not be able to create perfect results.

Your list is not exhaustive:)
There are more faults with these images that were shot with a Nikon D7000 and a Nikkor 10.5 mm (...apparently about 18 months ago on a NN-4 or NN-5):
- Distance focus setting wasn't locked and it varies from one image to the other. Thus the projection of the Nikkor 10.5 mm lens varies slightly with this erratic focus shifting.
- The image auto-orientation option of the camera has probably not been disabled. Thus the zenith and "nadir" images were recorded in Landscape mode while the "horizontal" shots are in portrait orientation: having no clue to know which way to rotate the image correctly, the X and Y shift parameters are then possibly wrongly estimated ...and PTGui requests to have the images presented with the same mode.
- While the two last images were obviously shot by tentatively pivoting 180° around a virtual single point by reversing the vertical arm of the NN head (with the possible intention to grossly coincide with the NPP of the horizontal shots), there is no real nadir shot provided with the lens NPP accurately set on the pivot axis and where (usually) the panoramic head appears on the center if the image.

As a consequence of the latter point, pano-spheric imaging is impossible to complete correctly with APG. Using one or both of the provided "nadir" images yields stitch errors. AFAIK APG cannot presently cope with such a source image...
BTW the Field of View (160°) is not correctly estimated by your "quick" trial: with the help of some manually set CP, it is more correctly measured by APG after optimization at 184°
I suspect that the nadir shots "duo" redundancy was due to a misconception by the panophotographer of PTGui Pro requirement for ViewPoint correction: a single image would have been sufficient.

Michel

digipano wrote:

You can go wrong with both software & you can stitch wondeful panoramas with both too, point is you need to get your panorama basics right.

That exactly is the point! The major difference i experienced ist the sky-blending. I had PTGui do perfect skies when APG rendered
darker or brighter (!) areas into the sky and it was suspected to be "vignetting". IF there was vignetting: why could PTGui render a perfect sky?

btw.: i never had vignetting with this lens - and i used f8 and f11, which most unlikely produces vignetting. I used a matte-box which was
perfectly adjusted to this lens.

best, Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2012-11-16 14:45:51)

gkaefer wrote:

digipano wrote:

HansKeesom wrote:

Now what does this tell you about autopano versus PTGUI ;-)

LOL... it tells that you taught & favoured autopano whereas she can do the same with ptgui.

no. she got trained on autopano now and now she can finalize them with success (with autopano)

Indeed, She really likes Autopano and has already left PTGUI behind though she had payed good money for it

AlexandreJ wrote:

klausesser wrote:

That exactly is the point! The major difference i experienced ist the sky-blending. I had PTGui do perfect skies when APG rendered
darker or brighter (!) areas into the sky and it was suspected to be "vignetting". IF there was vignetting: why could PTGui render a perfect sky?

btw.: i never had vignetting with this lens - and i used f8 and f11, which most unlikely produces vignetting. I used a matte-box which was
perfectly adjusted to this lens.

I already answered to this assumption to you Klaus.
1) If you don't use antighost, but linear blending, everything is fine. As in ptgui
2) There is vignetting, for sure. No doubt because we can even measure it with our new color correction system planned for v3.1.

Hey Alexandre!

I used the lens for several jobs since then with the very same aperture and lens-shade/mattebox - without having any issue. I photographed grey walls to find out about vignetting on the lenses i use.
I guess the problem was amplified by the very brutal light i had in these shots some months ago.

I didn´t try linear blending i must confess - oversaw the hint, sorry.

In my first time with AutoPano around 2006 i encountered vignetting-issues sometimes - then i found some lenses showing very few vignetting (there is no lens WITHOUT vignetting).
Though there was clearly vignetting the ColorCorrection in AutoPano equalized it perfectly!

At f8/f11 - which i usually have - vignetting isn´t a problem at all with a good 85mm Nikon lens. Vignetting produces dark areas in the sky - my issue at the time we argued about this item weren´t dark areas but bright areas on the borders
between images.

So since when vignetting makes bright areas instead of darker ones?
Why dosn´t PTGUI produce ANY vignetting-issues with the very same pictures? Ok - i now learned it´s linear blending.

To point that out: i don´t like to use PTGui - APG is my favourite. It definitely has vital advantages over PTGui.

If linear blending is the way to come close to the results PTGui provides - and no other isues rise using linear blend instead of antighost - i´ll be happy to use it each time i use my Nikon 85mm lens @f8 and f11 outdoors with blue skies . .

best to you, Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2012-11-27 20:28:36)