zbigi wrote:

I do not think that level of result is that You would like to reach.

Right. And it´s not the level of results what you get when you´re doing things right.

You need to have an exactly 2:1 image to avoid such issues. You definitely don´t have that.
To get it you have to shoot (!) a full sphere using a pano-head.

Can you post the whole image please so that we can see the dimensions - and show the editor-settings regarding the stitch?

best, Klaus

Let me say it this way: the problem here definitely is not in the software . . .

zbigi wrote:

By the way. Klaus, I know the basics of the panorama knowledges.

That´s fine. Then you know that this issue looks typical for incorrect proportions and not for a blending-problem.
That´s because in PanoTouPro - with which you generated your Zenith image i guess - no blending tooks place at all.

Do you have this issue with your own panos also?

best, Klaus

P.S.: did you retouch the sky in any way?

Last edited by klausesser (2012-01-28 16:58:38)

Thanks, Klaus, for Your answer.

klausesser wrote:

zbigi wrote:

It is a panorama stitched for one of my coleagues.

... Nadir that his head´s footprint is asymmetrical.
That indicates he didn´t match the NPP exactly.

In the meaning of the issue this might be the reason. The sky shows a fading of several different density...

You are right concerning the setting of the NPP. I am fully agree with You.

But I don't think, You are right concerning the sky-blue. As You for sure know, the paralax for  more distant object is not nociteable and You can forget about paralax for that objects. There are the people making panos from free hand and for sure You have seen such made panoramas. Are You noticed the "cone effect" on the sky on such panoramas! That would be a contradiction of the theory of parallax.
A general Question: whats for ist the blending implemented in stitchers, if not also for that reason: to blend the shades in the adjacent zones?

The version 2.6.1 I have downloaded just one or thre days ago, and I did not stitched any from my own panos containg claean blue sky. If I do some test with my pown pictures I let to know about it.

Generally: I have a filling that the problem I have signalized a few months ago is not interesting to much anyone expect of You. Especially is not interesting the developers of Autopano. Isn't it?

Or they are knowing that in that point they did not  make any progress and therefore the item about new blending module has been remooved from the description of the version 2.6.1.

Last edited by zbigi (2012-01-28 17:48:12)

klausesser wrote:

...You issue relates to the borders of the images. They are "folded" together in PanpTourPro - not in AutoPano...

I am not using at those picture Pnotour. It all test have been made using DevalVR viewer. Could it be a problem this software? I have to make some tests. This program will never have disappointed me.

klausesser wrote:

...that´s why the answers rare . .

And if the even answer the tip was: the dimension of the panorama shoul be a power of two, that means - according that rule - width of panorama should be in pixels 2^something, for instance  s^23=8388608 or  2^24=16777216. You should not have panorama with width (just one example) of 12000px.

Last edited by zbigi (2012-01-28 19:37:41)

Klaus, many thanks for Your investigation. I am doing another  things important in that moment, therefore I am not able to participate enough deeply in investigating the problem at that moment. Sorry for that.
A you mentioned, perhaps the problem is because the Autopano giga is not discovering the focal length of the lens properly? The pictures has been taken with Sony Nex + 16 mm lens equiped with oryginal Sony fisheye adapter. According my knowledges that adapter is changing the lens focal length with the factor 0.62, what is meaning that the effective focal length is equal 9.92. If the value calculated by the Autopano program (which is - as I know - trying independently to find the best  focal length value)  will be different, AP can wrap the picture a little bit ot the top? Perhaps You are right. I noticed also that a one large building on the panorama has a concave roof line instead of straight, what confirms Your supposition about wrapping.

I will try to stitch the images again with the different focal length declared and maybe tha will give bestter result?

Thank You again, Klaus, for your interest and conclusions.

Iteresting is, that the program itself have given for that output (equirectangular) picture this 2:1 dimensions ratio.

I am not having any idea at that moment how should I  stitch such pictures to rach a 'normal" result. I did force the dimension of the panoram.
Actually I have had In the settings (tab Panorama, group Panorama layout): Preferred projection: Automatic, Preferred Extend: Maximum projection range.
Meybe it will better to set explicit Preffered projection as Spherical?

I had not any problems with my canon pictures.

Last edited by zbigi (2012-01-28 22:59:41)

The lens type has been set as fisheye, of course.

Hello!

Sorry for perhaps to late answer, but I was busy with important task and I have rare looked on that forum.

The TIF pictures (copressed) in ZIP Archive is huge: about 0,5 GB. Therefore I have not decided to upload that file trough my 4 MBps link  and I have ziped the JPG's, (having the same content), with hope that they can be heplpful for diagnosing the problem.

Source pictures are accessible to download form that link: http://fotopano.pl/testfiles/ap_error/DSC01188.ZIP

The pictures have been taken with Sony Nex camer with 16 mm lens + Sony Fishe eye converter (x 0.62), thea means effecti focal lens (nomianly) is 9.92 mm.

Here http://www.panoguide.com/forums/qna/9196/ it is explained, that the converting factor of the Sony fish eye attachement is simply not true. It should be used a factor of 0.64, but I did not know about it duriing stitching those pictures. As I know AP is calculating proper focal length themselves (?).

Last edited by zbigi (2012-01-31 20:09:42)

zbigi wrote:

The pictures have been taken with Sony Nex camer with 16 mm lens + Sony Fishe eye converter (x 0.62), thea means effecti focal lens (nomianly) is 9.92 mm.

Regarding the use of a converter the result is brilliant!

I downloaded your pics an will try.

best, Klaus

Thanks, Klaus!
Your result is fully satisfied.
That is meaning, that perhaps  I've made a mistake somewhere. But I don't know where...
My version is here: http://fotopano.pl/katowice/.
Thanks for demostration of Your knowledges. I am really impressed.
But believe me, I have in the matter of fact met difficulties with the sky blue area. And I have done everything the same way as usual.
In my oppinion tere is in fact a problem withe the blender...
I have asked the people living in Katowice and I know, that the building which seems to be concave is realy not flat!