 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| ||||||||
 |
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
| 
| User list | Rules | You are not logged in.
Hi, when I take these three images in autopano and it gives me the preview, everything looks fine, looks like it works.. but when i go to make the full resolution final image, it comes out all garbled. Can anyone put this together, or show me how? I know its not an ideal set of images to stitch but I just took them on a whim.. Thanks!
4mb file with three images:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/s89wpf
Offline
It is pretty late at night here so I will post what I did and then explain how I did it tomorrow!
Note: the first one was blended using multiband the second smartblend
btw: the image names are IMG_ (which is Canon?) but I can't find any EXIF data.
Last edited by leedsjoe (2009-01-28 00:36:43)
Offline
It's not a perfect stitch and looking at the images I doubt it could be - I didn't attempt any manual CP editing - but it's not 'garbled'.
Used centre point tool to centre it, crop tool to crop.
Here's my settings used in App 1.4.2 and the result - rendered with spline36 interpolator and Smartblend.
Tweaked the levels and sharpened a little.
Last edited by mediavets (2009-01-28 02:30:52)
Offline
This was quite a challenge!
I spent an hour and this was as good as I could get it.
I couldn't make it work until I put used PTLens to tilt the images back into perspective.
The first two attachments are before and afters of one of the outer images using PTLens.
Next is the CP Editor setting in APP and the result.
I took the same three images (post PTLens) and used Photoshop to Photomerge them and got the result in the fifth picture.
Last edited by jmardy (2009-01-28 09:10:36)
Offline
thanks mediavets, when i change quality of detection to high and check advanced distortion i get the same result as you, and jmardy, thanks for the tips on ptlens and photomerge, will definitely have to play around with both. thanks everyone!
Offline
btw, planar projection gives almost the same result as your post ptlens images jmardy
Offline
grapedrink,
What do you think of this variant.
I guessed the focal length at 27mm (from values displayed in blended layer table from my first stitch efforts) and entered that in image settings for each image in group window, with settings shown below I got this result with spherical projection. Rendered using spline36 interpolator and Smartblend.
Not perfect but pretty good IMO, considering the nature of the source images. I did no manual CP editing and no preprocessing of images.
Downsized, levels tweaked and some sharpening of stitched pano with image editor .
So seems you would have got a better result straight away if you had not somehow stripped outt the EXIF data before stitching.
Last edited by mediavets (2009-01-28 20:37:58)
Offline
grapedrink wrote:
btw, planar projection gives almost the same result as your post ptlens images jmardy
Not when I do it...
I used Planar and got a result almost identical to the bowed out rectangle above.
The only way I could remedy that was to modify the source images.
Can you elaborate?
Offline
This is my stitch as a planar projection: I prefer the spherical projection.
Last edited by mediavets (2009-01-29 00:15:11)
Offline
jmardy wrote:
grapedrink wrote:
btw, planar projection gives almost the same result as your post ptlens images jmardy
Not when I do it...
I used Planar and got a result almost identical to the bowed out rectangle above.
The only way I could remedy that was to modify the source images.
Can you elaborate?
To get a planar result the exact focal length of the lens must be entered before detection and left unchanged (or nearly) by Autopano during optimization.
When - for any reason - the optimized lens FOV differs from the actual lens FOV, the planar projection result is not really correct and straight lines are not straight...
Offline
GURL wrote:
jmardy wrote:
grapedrink wrote:
btw, planar projection gives almost the same result as your post ptlens images jmardy
Not when I do it...
I used Planar and got a result almost identical to the bowed out rectangle above.
The only way I could remedy that was to modify the source images.
Can you elaborate?To get a planar result the exact focal length of the lens must be entered before detection and left unchanged (or nearly) by Autopano during optimization.
When - for any reason - the optimized lens FOV differs from the actual lens FOV, the planar projection result is not really correct and straight lines are not straight...
That makes sense.
Thank you.
Offline
Hi grapedrink,
It seems clear that pict IMG_5707.JPG was not taken from same place than others, parallax is quite strong (see lights, 'chandeliers', compare to ceiling). I'm afraid that mixing all 3 picts cannot give a good result, except if you are a lucky guy 
Between right pict IMG_5699.JPG anf left one IMG_5701.JPG, don't you have a IMG_5700.JPG shooting ceiling center from the same place ?
Offline