[APG 1.6 b1] frustrated  

This forum is dedicated to Autopano Pro / Giga bug reports and features discussion.
Please read the posting rules before starting a topic!
no avatar
hermer-blr
Member
 
Posts: 237
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Near Paris - France
Info

by hermer-blr » Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:10 pm

They are in vacation, I guess. That"s why they do not answer our posts.

It was quite brave (or stupid) to issue a new release of Autopano just before going for holidays... Users raising points, complaining, etc... and nobody from Kolor to answer...
Nikon D5100 (formerly Nikon D60) - Sigma 10-20 - 24 shots Panoramas in 3 raws
Windows 32 bits - APG
website htt://jmh.trp.free.fr

User avatar
Lionel Laissus
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 181
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:32 pm
Info

by Lionel Laissus » Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:59 pm

I have the feeling that the summer is very passionated this year !!!!
BTW Kolor is not closed and people are working.

You are saying that Autopano is going to the wrong direction I think we got the message ....
We are going to improve reliability and the documentation believe me.

Thank you for your feedbacks they always help us to stay on the right track.

no avatar
vklaffehn
Member
 
Posts: 135
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 1:10 pm
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Info

by vklaffehn » Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:27 pm

Hi!

I just want to take up the cudgels for Kolor and APP/APG, I'm using APG since the release 2.09 and from that point it seems to have improved a lot, althoug with some steps back. I made some tours back in the days of 2.09, and it was hard work to get them stitched right, and whenever a new release comes out I just throw these images in and see if it gets better. Most of my image sets which needed a lot of handwork an manual moving (no manual cp's back there) are working fully without intervention now, even many of my GigaPan style shoots stitch now even without using the import filter. The only thing that gives me headaches sometimes is the color correction, but changing the correcting mode or selecting a different (or none at all) reference image gives good results. One thing I noticed is that the newer versions are more sensitive to images taken the 'wrong' way, so some handheld shots done in AUTO (ev/WB etv.)mode look better in the older versions, but shots taken with manual settings look good to me.

I dontt have PtGUI for Reference but I also like the workflow in APG, and the panos I get are the way I want, only on HDR I have my problems...

So Kolor, I think your Software is not bad, just a few things a a bit complicated by now. So get some good documentation, useful default settings and keep the good work!

By the way, this is my only commercial software where I can directly 'speak' to the developers, and I don't mind if they take some days to answer a question :-)

MfG
V.Klaffehn

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:19 pm

Lionel Laissus wrote:I have the feeling that the summer is very passionated this year !!!!

And there are reasons!

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
HansKeesom
Member
 
Posts: 2210
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Info

by HansKeesom » Thu Jul 28, 2011 7:54 am

klausesser wrote:
Lionel Laissus wrote:I have the feeling that the summer is very passionated this year !!!!

And there are reasons!

best, Klaus

There sure are.

People's business is depending on the tools they use. They want their tools to be reliable so they can deliver to their customers. Of course we want certain features that will make it easier to deliver to our customers but never at the cost of being able to do the same thing as with the last version, only as an addition. If they block my normal productivity, I have no problem paying a few hundred euro s to get me a tool that will allow me to be productive.
As a maker of commercial panorama s I have no interest in all kind of HDR and color-mapping options, neither do my customers, I just want to work quickly from pictures to panorarama's. Autopano is nice as it allows my to have a collection of photos, group them as groups and render them in the background (ver 2.0.9, not 2.5.2 unfortunately) and be very productive. But if the stitching fails, I have to spend days extra that I don't want to spend as I need to get started with the next project/customer.

cheers,

Hans
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: 25 euro or less, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you. Free TB of Dropbox space when you have more then 250 euro business a year.

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:28 am

HansKeesom wrote:But if the stitching fails, I have to spend days extra that I don't want to spend as I need to get started with the next project/customer.

I agree. The success of AP was founded on the very good handling compared to PTGui and others when it came out - that was some years ago. In the meantime not only PTGui mutated zo a very useful tool but in the same time AP got more and more complex - and overfreighted with features which commerically working people like us rarely need. We need first of all: reliability and continuity of workflows. I must be able to work on projects i did one or two years ago and use the constructionfiles for not to have to re-run the whole process of stitching again. That´s a BIG problem with PTP for example.
I definitely don´t need excessive lens-model settings in APG which i don´t know what they do and which are documented nowhere. I also don´t need to have a "HDR" feature which doesn´t do what´s expected and a "Fusion" feature which behaves like a lottery: most of the time you miss - sometimes you win.

Any kind of documentation i read till today is merely a joke - it tells something to people who know already. The rest simply keeps badly informed of how to deal with items to get good results and WHY they get the results.
It´s useless to describe: "pushing this button the app does that". That doesn´t explain WHY the app is doing WHAT at WHICH stage of what you want to achieve.

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
hub
Member
 
Posts: 150
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:14 pm
Location: Annecy
Info

by hub » Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:22 pm

The founding idea of Autopano, at least such as I memorized and which pleased me, was:

- simple and fast editing of panoramas by an automation of some complex and boring tasks.
- bigger freedom during the shooting ( paralaxe, automatic exposition).

This strategy differentiated Autopano of the competition and allows it's success.

Today, Kolor scatters more and more: gigapanos, krpano interface, 3D video player, webcams in ski resorts... I am persuaded that these new tracks of développpement were made to the detriment of the software Autopano.


It is necessary to remind, that for more than a year, Autopano has been decomposed in pieces. We have now the new engine, the new system of evaluation of control points, the new blender, the new system of tonal correction, the new treatment of HDR and nothing works correctly! On the other hand, on the pretext of a reason given to the users, Kolor propose Autopano integration in Piccassa, LR and the other thingies....

I think, that a promise of Liassus to listen the users is useless and unimportant. We expect from Kolor the seriousness, the continuity, the professionalism.

Sorry for my bad english, Hub

User avatar
Lionel Laissus
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 181
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:32 pm
Info

by Lionel Laissus » Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:44 pm

Hi Hub
You are right about complaining to us and to be frustrated but could you spell my last name right I will appreciate that !!! THX

no avatar
hub
Member
 
Posts: 150
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:14 pm
Location: Annecy
Info

by hub » Thu Jul 28, 2011 4:18 pm

Sorry for my bad spelling of your name

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:02 pm

Hi.. As we all know the HDR and Fusion are features of apg that simply DO NOT WORK, therefore most of use are HAVING to use a third party software applications to process their Fusion or HDR images.. As you know I have only just realised what fusion and HDR images are but now that I have experimented with this image process over these past few months, I have realised that this medium is just amazing and I also feel in many areas of photography within VR movie, this feature is very very essential and necessary in order to create a great pano result.

APG is just not up to the task of outputting a nice Fused or HDR image, unfortunately apg doesn't like to process Photomatix images very well either, where as PTGui loves them and as a consequence processes a great Fused or HDR pano image result.. Perhaps since kolor have added a Fusion and HDR feature, it has lost its way in ensuring other software apps work well within apg and thereby ignoring other processed images from third party applications..

I love cross platform software where I can bounce an image back and forth between them without effecting the quality of the images.. Unfortunately apg is not one of them.... It hates Photomatix images.. If the kolor team could focus on facilitating the way third party Fusion or HDR images are processed through apg, and allow for a great blended and stitched image result, then it would have made a great leap forward....

If PTGui can do it then I am sure apg can too...

Just one last point.. I have mentioned this before... The first version of apg I used never crashed but the newer versions are becoming unstable and crashing which should be of great concern to kolor... PTGui has NEVER crashed....

Destiny.....
Last edited by Destiny on Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
leifs
Member
 
Posts: 648
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:08 pm
Location: Ørsta Norway
Info

by leifs » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:29 pm

I have used Photomatix Pro 4.02 (win7 64bit) to fuse pictures and apg 2.52 to make cylinder panos with no problems. maybe there are some "sphere-specific" problems somewhere ?

Leif
Olympus OM-D E-M1, Leica 25mm f1.4, fisheye, zooms, primes
Seitz VRdrive2
2x Intel Xeon E5-2660, 128GB RAM, Win7 64bit, SSD RAIDs

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:24 am

Hi.. yes I am sure you are right.. I have heard of a few people having few issues but unfortunately I am not one of them.. i keep coming back the line of thinking that apg has options for soooo many lenses and cameras that it is not focussed enough on most them.... I am sure my gear is not entirely compatible with apg settings... When I put my normal unfused images into apg it says my focal length is 9.84.. but my lens is a 10.5.. PTGui shows it as a 10.5, so perhaps this is the main problem.. I really do not know... I have tried, when I import Photomatix images, setting it to 9.84 and 10.5 and everything else in between driving me NUTS...

After I have set this focal length to 10.5, and then put a new set of images into apg, it then show them with a focal length of 10.5... In other words, apg doesn't really know, its guessing... If I set it to 12 and then put a new set of images into apg they then show as 12... So go figure!!!... If apg cannot even recognise my basic images, how will it be able to recognise a fused set of images from Photomatix... Even when I put a fused set of fused images into PTGui it still shows my lens to be a 10.5 fisheye... I have to admit.. I too get confused as to the true meaning of 'Auto'.. Auto what, auto confusion, auto pain in the neck, auto no information, auto yuck pano.... >>>> emm... perhaps Auto means.. Automatically setting it to the wrong setting by the user... Like, if I set it to 12.6, it Automatically sets the next set to this.. EVEN THOHGH i HAVE USED A DIFFERENT LENS ALTOGETHER.... Turning apg off will not fix it.. rebooting my Mac will bring it back to 9.84!!... Like I said, I really do not think apg really does recognise my lens at all... I have heard from a friend however, it does recognise a 16mm Fisheye lens a lot better....

Destiny...

leifs wrote:I have used Photomatix Pro 4.02 (win7 64bit) to fuse pictures and apg 2.52 to make cylinder panos with no problems. maybe there are some "sphere-specific" problems somewhere ?

Leif


Last edited by Destiny on Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:28 am

PS to everyone.. just to let you know that there is a major update of Photomatix available.. fixes many bugs and issues... I will run a set of images into apg and see if my BUG is fixed... :)

Destiny

User avatar
Lionel Laissus
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 181
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:32 pm
Info

by Lionel Laissus » Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:40 am

hub wrote:Sorry for my bad spelling of your name

No problem It happens especially when something get on your nerves ...

no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:40 am

Hi.. I have been wondering so much if its something I am doing which is effecting my panos outcome..

Now, during this shoot I have everything set to manual.. The lot..

I have just tried to create an object VR using the kolor object droplet... So.. one would expect, if nothing changes between the first shot and the last shot, the light and colour etc should be the same or as close to it... So.. those guru out there.. what am I doing soo wrong.. I changed nothing, no extra lighting, NOTHING... yet you can see a huge difference in lighting... I used a wireless remote so I never even touched the camera..

I think this is relevant to this ticket since it might be my lighting or something I am doing or not doing which is at root of my problems..

So.. what can I be doing wrong....

Destiny...



no avatar
Destiny
Moderator
 
Posts: 7886
Likes: 6 posts
Liked in: 228 posts
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:55 pm
Info

by Destiny » Sun Jul 31, 2011 12:00 pm

I have just done it again but this time all auto.. all images are the same... Do you think that my manual settings might be effecting the outcome of my panos if this lighting issue occurs during the shooting of my pano images... Very confusing.... it seems like it was progressive.. perhaps the lighting needed to warm up.. its only a couple of Florissant tubes... I had my manual lighting set to this.... This shoot took a lot longer than a pano would so perhaps I need to look at the light changing over the duration of shooting a pano... put the last and first images next to each other...

Destiny...

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:05 pm

Destiny wrote:I have just done it again but this time all auto.. all images are the same... Do you think that my manual settings might be effecting the outcome of my panos if this lighting issue occurs during the shooting of my pano images... Very confusing.... it seems like it was progressive.. perhaps the lighting needed to warm up.. its only a couple of Florissant tubes... I had my manual lighting set to this.... This shoot took a lot longer than a pano would so perhaps I need to look at the light changing over the duration of shooting a pano... put the last and first images next to each other...

Destiny...

Hi!

Most of the tubes flicker! Use exposuretimes longer than 1/30 - i suggest 1/15 or 1/8. It depends on the frequency the tube´s balast work with.

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
HansKeesom
Member
 
Posts: 2210
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Info

by HansKeesom » Sun Jul 31, 2011 10:56 pm

Hi I've spend the last few days testing PTGui and feel I can now tell what I like and do not like of it.
I hope the people of Kolor can use it to improve autopano.

What I like about PTGui that I can go back and forth in the production line using the tabs. With autopano there is a big line in the middel you cross once you detect. Settings you change after detections are lost when you go back to the left side before the detection step. For example cropping I would like to be able to do even after detection has been done

What I like even better in PTGUI is the integrated possibility to create masks to hide part of the photo by making it transparant. Really could use this in autopano. don;t understand why it is not there yet and why HDR is..... best place to put it is problably in the editor in the right column so after detection.

Hope to see this in autopano soon, would save me 149 euro on ptgui....
Last edited by HansKeesom on Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: 25 euro or less, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you. Free TB of Dropbox space when you have more then 250 euro business a year.

no avatar
HansKeesom
Member
 
Posts: 2210
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Info

by HansKeesom » Tue Aug 02, 2011 11:59 am

Have to be honest, I just found out that the problem seems to be using antighost on bracketed images. When having single shots antighost is a good default but as soon as exposure bracketing was using the rendering delivers lots of broken bones in result.
Knowing this I think I can be very productive again with 2.6.0
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: 25 euro or less, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you. Free TB of Dropbox space when you have more then 250 euro business a year.

User avatar
AlexandreJ
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 5987
Likes: 7 posts
Liked in: 10 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:56 pm
Location: Francin, France
Info

by AlexandreJ » Wed Aug 03, 2011 1:27 pm

Waouh,

It seems that some people used the fact that I was in holiday to push some stress here :)

Let me resume the issues which are reported here :
- Lack of documentation : I'm a bit disappointed about this one, because we never did such effort as we did for the documentation of v2.5. Everything is quite up to date here : http://www.autopano.net/wiki-en/action/view/Autopano_Giga_Documentation and we are doing a lot of workflow tutorials on several aspects.
Moreover, we're publishing a lot of videos too. See our youtube channel here : http://www.youtube.com/user/wwwKOLORcom
Now, it's true that except some quick video, we didn't update the documentation for v2.6 because it's still in beta stage.
- HDR workflow. Yes, it's not perfect because of some issues like the GPU preview that doesn't reflect really the rendering. We know that but it won't be possible to correct that without breaking the real time aspect of the editor. If you think about PtGui, it's exactly how it's done there ( fusion, preview ... waiting time, then a new preview with fusion parameter appears ). We could have done it this way too, but it doesn't fit the autopano editor spirit, so we did a quick and dirty preview in GPU mode that doesn't work reflect the rendering. That part is planned for v3.
- Masking : asked a lot of time. It's part of the editor revamp.
- 10.5 mm versus 9.85 mm for Nikkor 10.5 : it depends on the way exif are read and focal length calculated. This should be okay in v2.6 ( even beta ).
- 2.6Beta1 : yes, this version breaks some internal structure in autopano. Sometimes, you need not to be backward compatible. It hurts me, but I cannot do anything clever against that. A new panorama detected with this version should work perfectly, but opening some old .pano could result in bad panorama ( even if I tested all .pano version ).

Sorry, I just remind these topics, but there are probably much more that would require some answer ( I'm back just for 2 days before going to the Siggraph ). I will be able to answer more in depth after that exhibition.

Some general remarks :
- We spend a lot of time in v2.5 engine just on the rendering part. The anti-ghost and fusion rendering engine are the best out there and many people are now using it because there is just no other solution that works like that on gigapixels. Perhaps we have concentrated too much on this kind of panorama but that was upon customers demand ( papywizard support, gigapan support, anti-ghost on gigapixels ), etc. All the years spend on this aspect of the software of course were not spend on other parts.
If I could rewind time, we could have made other decisions. Anyway.
- With the success of Panotour ( and don't tell me here you don't like the way this product evolves ), more and more people are using Autopano not for general panorama work but for VR work which is a subcategory of panorama stitching. PtGui is totally designed for such panoramic job and works really good in many cases. We need to be at least as good as this product in the VR stitching too. In many cases, we were already since v2.0 version but without support of HDR for example. With the revamp of lens distortion with 2.6 we are at the same level or even higher for geometric stitching part ( better detection and perfect alignement of images even on short rectilinear focal length ). Moreover, we allow a far greater freedom in shooting ( during my holiday I did quite 50 VR, all of them handheld. It's not perfect and cannot compete with a well aligned panoramic head, but still, this is cool and unique ). It seems for me that for this question, we'll need some good tutorials on how to shoot well for VR and stitch them, right ? Or did I missunderstood something about VR stitching.
- About the "auto" part. It's still the goal of autopano. But as the type of panorama becomes more and more numerous, we need more and more tools and not all of them can be made automatic. One example is fused panorama : you need the camera to be setup well so that the exif metadata stores the right settings, so that stacks are automatically created, so that fusion can be used as default. About homography and similarity : I had the idea to add a new entry there : automatic. So that the choice is not yours but the software ( in fact, that's how 2.0 worked but nothing was public. It you prefer such settings to be hidden, it's easy to do ).

We are always listening what you are saying ( and this forum thread should confirm that ), so why not make here some proposals about :
- tutorials that are needed ( and not there yet ),
- On which part of the software you want us to concentrate first,
- something else ...

Just leave bugs in separated topics, here I think that a more general thinking is needed rather than bug posting.

no avatar
Marmotte06
Member
 
Posts: 64
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 1:37 pm
Location: St Laurent du Var, France
Info

by Marmotte06 » Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:23 pm

AlexandreJ wrote:We are always listening what you are saying ( and this forum thread should confirm that ), so why not make here some proposals about :
- tutorials that are needed ( and not there yet ),
- On which part of the software you want us to concentrate first,
- something else ...

Just leave bugs in separated topics, here I think that a more general thinking is needed rather than bug posting.

Well, Alexandre, it seems your summary of this thread is: "Damned customers daring to complain, I know better than you what you need, you will just get more of it !"

The basic complaint is not about new features, it is about making the existing features work, simply and reliably, before adding tons of fancy stuff that some customers might have asked, but certainly not the majority of your customers. Should you move forward with the current approach, you will possibly attract some highly demanding customers, but you will also certainly lose a large number of loyal customers. Personally I wait for the 2.6 final to re-process my panos that currently don't pass. If 2.6 still fails and is still so complex, I'll evaluate PtGUI, as it seems others in this forum like it.

The "general thinking" ? Please focus on quality and usability, and deliver. Then it will be time to think about 3.0.

Olivier

User avatar
AlexandreJ
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 5987
Likes: 7 posts
Liked in: 10 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:56 pm
Location: Francin, France
Info

by AlexandreJ » Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:52 pm

Marmotte06 wrote:Well, Alexandre, it seems your summary of this thread is: "Damned customers daring to complain, I know better than you what you need, you will just get more of it !"

That's totally false and was not at all my feeling of my posting. I always said loud and clear here that you know your photographic job, and that's why discussion is vital.

I have my own experience with autopano for which in each version, I really see the improvement : I'm able to process more difficult panoramas in a faster way and I'm happy with that. On the other hand, it seems that some people are having issues with the software and I really want to know where the issues are located to be able to address them. That's as simple as that.
Perhaps everything is just in the problem : "oh, autopano didn't manage to stitch directly and perfectly the panorama : how can I help him ?".

One sidenote : We are the only software editor that you can contact directly through contact form and provide us some example cases so we can help you to stitch them with our software. One guy here is just paid for that. In the 2 last months, all cases proposed were stitchable well with the right workflow, only one was hard because of a wrong shooting setup.

no avatar
HansKeesom
Member
 
Posts: 2210
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Info

by HansKeesom » Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:28 pm

AlexandreJ wrote:
Marmotte06 wrote:Well, Alexandre, it seems your summary of this thread is: "Damned customers daring to complain, I know better than you what you need, you will just get more of it !"

That's totally false and was not at all my feeling of my posting. I always said loud and clear here that you know your photographic job, and that's why discussion is vital.

I have my own experience with autopano for which in each version, I really see the improvement : I'm able to process more difficult panoramas in a faster way and I'm happy with that. On the other hand, it seems that some people are having issues with the software and I really want to know where the issues are located to be able to address them. That's as simple as that.
Perhaps everything is just in the problem : "oh, autopano didn't manage to stitch directly and perfectly the panorama : how can I help him ?".

One sidenote : We are the only software editor that you can contact directly through contact form and provide us some example cases so we can help you to stitch them with our software. One guy here is just paid for that. In the 2 last months, all cases proposed were stitchable well with the right workflow, only one was hard because of a wrong shooting setup.

Dear Alexandre,

When I read the first line of your earlier message "It seems that some people used the fact that I was in holiday to push some stress here " my response was "ouch, why do you write that" . Although you clearly added a smiley, i believe this is a risky yoke on a helpforum, ceratinly when working for the company who's products are discussed . Yokes are easily misunderstood online. And indeed it did not take long before someone did.

Yes it is great you have an active forum and yes it is great someone is helping people that get stuck. And although not everyone will like me for saying this, but I would pay for this support by paying the products new price every year again.
But please do not make yokes about [s]people's[/s] custumors griefs. I have been working on a helpdesk for two year and I know sometimes customers came up with the strangest things, always take them serious, they are paying your salary.

I think the general thing at the moment is that people are used to working in a certain way with autopano. When they install a new version, lately this meant that there was a lot to be relearned and people don't like that. We want to keep what we have and add the new things.
I think it will help a lot when te installation process of a new version takes a look at all the settings people had in the old version and tries to map things to the new version where possible and take defaults wherever possible. You yourself give the example of "homography and similarity" and that in older version it was a hidden value that was automaticly choosen. If you bring that to the userinterface the default value should be "same value as old version"

In a way this whole discussion is a good thing. It means that since 2.0.9 we have a good grown up product that we really appreciate as tool in our toolbox. Of course we are interested in new versions and their improvement but as we appreciated what was in the old versions we like to take that with us to newer versions. So slow down and only carefully extend this product.

Regards,

Hans

" If you think about PtGui, it's exactly how it's done there ( fusion, preview ... waiting time, then a new preview with fusion parameter appears )."
I actually like this and fully accept the waiting time. I really want to know before rendering what the change I just did is gonna look like. So don't worry about this waiting time.

" We could have done it this way too, but it doesn't fit the autopano editor spirit, so we did a quick and dirty preview in GPU mode that doesn't work reflect the rendering."
As you understand I am not sure I agree with the choice you made

"- Masking : asked a lot of time. It's part of the editor revamp.""
uuuuuhhhhh when am I gonna have that????? I have so excited
Last edited by HansKeesom on Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: 25 euro or less, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you. Free TB of Dropbox space when you have more then 250 euro business a year.

User avatar
gkaefer
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 3549
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 15 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: Salzburg
Info

by gkaefer » Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:55 pm

gkaefer wrote:to be honest - I'm very frustrated and disapointed - each new APG version - a little bit more. more option getting more and more complex giving you more and more chance to combine the wrong option (without hint or explanation) giving you finally garbage result.

project, presets workflows which worked for several project - no longer succeed
new additional features and options nobody knows which effect will be waiting looking at the rendered pano
still no complete documentation nore one which can guide you where you can see what happens, which option has to be set with which value and which option options combined to succed...
if you save the project after all optimized (RMS perfect, stitching result perfect) but after reopening the (with guarantee) saved project ALL is gone and the status after initial detection was saved and now loaded
using presets which worked perfect in past (exposue fusion and anti-ghoast) now have an option "Cutting" with suboption "Ghoast removing") per default enabled and see the different result: preview more or less acceptable but render result

but yes one advantage now: the new rendering engine gives you on the fisheye panos the worse rendering result a little bit faster ...

Georg

Hi Alexandre,
which chapter of your referenced documentation do I have to reread to be able to successfully (with 2.6 b1) render my pano I initially in this thread reported my "frustration" with?
2.6 failed after 2 days of try and error combining all the (maybe wrong) settings (review my screenshot: preview was allways ok, render result had this big errors ...)
2.09 succeeded within 1 minute with default settings
and yes I finally had to postprocess the remaining errors (floor-squares + lightsource) because of the sub-optimum NPP allignement of my cam..
result of the 2.09 rendered and with PTP 1.6 rc3 created pano:
http://www.gigapixel.at/wp-content/uploads/marktschellenberg/marktschellenberg.html

Georg
Last edited by gkaefer on Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AlexandreJ
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 5987
Likes: 7 posts
Liked in: 10 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:56 pm
Location: Francin, France
Info

by AlexandreJ » Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:01 am

gkaefer wrote:which chapter of your referenced documentation do I have to reread to be able to successfully (with 2.6 b1) render my pano I initially in this thread reported my "frustration" with?

When I refer to the documentation, I always refere to stable version. We don't do any documentation for beta version because it's still in beta and options will evolve until reaching a more stable state. The documentation is written during RC phase ( We are doing that work now for Panotour / Panotour Pro 1.6 and that's the only fact that prevent us to release the final version, we want the complete documentation ).
So, no, there is no documentation about 2.6 yet except the published videos to illustrate the new concepts and highlight enhancements. We always did this way and I don't think we should change anything here.

gkaefer wrote:2.6 failed after 2 days of try and error combining all the (maybe wrong) settings (review my screenshot: preview was allways ok, render result had this big errors ...)
2.09 succeeded within 1 minute with default settings
and yes I finally had to postprocess the remaining errors (floor-squares + lightsource) because of the sub-optimum NPP allignement of my cam..
result of the 2.09 rendered and with PTP 1.6 rc3 created pano:
http://www.gigapixel.at/wp-content/uploads/marktschellenberg/marktschellenberg.html
Georg

I totally understand your frustation ( BTW don't hesite to share this case, I like it because it's complicate due to the white wall).
This kind of behaviour should not happen. So perhaps, we should not release any beta to prevent them ? Because it's mainly about that : should we wait before releasing something until it has enough stability or should we continue to share as soon as we think you can already play a little with it ? I don't have that answer.

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron