Blend or Position  

Share your tips and tricks here or get help with any Autopano Pro / Giga problem!
No bug reports (of any kind) in this forum!
no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

Blend or Position

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:00 am

Dear all

This is my first time on the forum so please be kind, if I am unclear or not doing things right I am sure I will get there in the end.

Anyway... onto the problem.

I love this software but I am getting a repeat problem. Before I describe the problem I will go through my setup, many years experience with graphics in general has tought me that a problem may be with the source, so here goes. Setup:

Sturdy Tripod
Nikon D80
11-16mm lens (good quality)
Pano Head
Paralax Procedure... done
Shots taken level
Shots take at regular intervals (pano maxx head, i thank you)

So thats the hardware and I am very careful not to move the tripod during the process however the problem I am having is with the stitching. I have attached a close up linea render that highlights the problem, I am guessing you guys have had the offset line up issue before. It would not be so annoying if I knew where to fix it; the second image, a screen grab from the ui clearly shows a perfect preview. So the question is, has this error occurred during the blending process or is it a position problem and I am missing something obvious.

As you can see from the screen grab, the system is telling me I have good RMS, this I am pleased about as I have gone to some lengths reviewing the control points, removing bad ones and adding in good, making sure that all images are referenced to their neighbour and beyond wherever possible.

This is re-occurring problem and my hope is that its user error, can be fixed easy and I will walk away having learned something new.

Many thanks in advance to anyone who can help.

Kind Regards

Edd





User avatar
ThomasV
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 300
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:12 pm
Info

by ThomasV » Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:53 am

Hello,

Could you give us a little more details about your rendering and color correction options, please ?

Thanks,
Thomas

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:56 am

Hi Thomas

The render you can see in the screen grab is Linea. This was done for highlighting purposes as it draws the eye to the problem area. However, the problem persists regardless whilst using auto color correct and the standard Anti-Ghost settings.

Screen grab attached.



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

by gkaefer » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:43 pm

which APP version do you use? if not, try the 3.0 beta 2.
about the stitch... try multiband level 0 (instead of -2). Does it get better or worser?
Georg

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:52 pm

HI George,

I have not tried the bets but your suggested settings sadly did not remedy the situation and have introduce banding to the image.



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

by gkaefer » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:04 pm

and when you now open the 2 neighbour images shown in your last screenshot showing the stitching error...
open the CP editor and let recognize new CPs over this area. (drawing rectangles above the left image and on same position on right image than CPs automatically get created (delete the red ones manually and finally press the "optimize the panorama" button. Does this solve the stitching error?

Georg

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:25 pm

HI George

I have gone to great lengths to ensure there are no red markers and added good markers of my own. So yes, done that already.

Regards

Edd

User avatar
ThomasV
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 300
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:12 pm
Info

by ThomasV » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:31 pm

Hello,

It looks like anti-ghost without multiband, but from what you show in your rendering options, it is not true. Strange...
Is it possible for you to upload the .pano (and the images if possible) to our ftp (http://www.kolor.com/forum/t766-ftp-server) ? It would be very helpful to solve this issue.

Regards,
Thomas

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:32 pm

Certainly Thomas

I am hoping its me not doing something right! Fingers crossed its an easy fix.

Regards

Edd

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:57 pm

Files uploaded

User avatar
ThomasV
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 300
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:12 pm
Info

by ThomasV » Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:07 pm

Hi,

We have just give a try to your pano. One important point is about your pictures, they all have a thin black area in the left upper corner. This kind of defaults results in large dark bands during the blend. You can see it clearly on the ceiling.

Nevertheless, we did not reproduce the first default you mentionned. But the blending issue might have badly influenced the anti-ghost.

Regards,
Thomas

no avatar
lumelix
Member
 
Posts: 528
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:51 pm
Location: Switzerland
Info

by lumelix » Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:41 pm

Hi edsnap

Did you use the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X ?
It's a nice lens but have a strong distortion.
And it's not a fisheye!

So have you use the correct settings for this lens, no fisheye ?
And have you checked the lens distortion correction in APG ?

You shot 38 images. This is lot to much for a lens with 104º Fov.
So APG can use images to stitch with a completely different perspective.
And this can give you this door frame looking so bad.

There are differences in exposure. Did you shoot with automatic exposure?
If so, try out manual exposure for your next shot.
Last edited by lumelix on Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Regards
Martin

no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:14 pm

Hi Lumelix

You are correct with the lens type, however its the least distorted lens of that nature for DX sensors on Nikon. As for fisheye, this has been ruled out on two counts. Firstly, resolution is needed for my projects that involve 3d texture capture from a series of pano spheres. Secondly, Auto Pano has new updated camera lens distortion models that are designed to cope with this, or so the marketing material says. I have attached a screen grab of my setting and you will see i have not chosen a fisheye profile. As to the number of shots, I am open to suggestions here but I was trying to ensure a decent amount of overlap between pictures. Knowing the lens as you do, have you any recommendations for number of shots and their orientation? ie 12 looking down, 12 looking up and non in the middle. I am in the middle of trying to resolve such technical issues so any help would be greatly appreciated.

All images are shot on manual focus to ensure consistant focal length and reduction in parallax. The exposure is also manual shooting at f10, hyperfocal distance giving sharp focus to anything greater than 0.45 meters from the lens. All shot on the correct and consistant shutter speed for a decent exposure

Regards

Edd



no avatar
edsnap
New member
 
Topic author
Posts: 8
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:46 am
Info

by edsnap » Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:54 pm

Dear all

A huge thank you for all your suggestions, its been very much appreciated and I am pleased to say that by taking the advice given, a solution has been found. To the experienced this will probably be more than obvious but to fellow debutants, i offer this conclusion.

My task required resolution as the panoramic images are destined to become sources of modelling and texturing for 3d games environments. Sadly this ruled out the use of fisheye lenses for which I am certain represents a reduced work load and therefore increase in accuracy. The clue to the solution lies here in workload terms and not asking Autopano to process too many images. When starting out on this mission my instinct was to make sure there was plenty of overlap so the software would have plenty to work with when recognising common points between shots. Sadly, this is not necessarily the case and actual trying to get away with as few shots as possible has actually rendered greater accuracy. Secondly, my first instinct was to use the full extent of my 11-16mm lens and zoom out as far as possible. Despite the lens being good quality and it being at the better end of the distortion scale, 11mm proved to much for the software to deal with. Thankfully, 16mm is working fine with 8 shots per 360 row working beautifully. The reduction in shots made it easy to edit and spot where extra control point were needed, secondly, it made it easier to get the links hovering around the 2 mark and certainly not letting anything go above 3.

So the moral of the storey; fewer shots, dont use the full extent of the zoom when zoomed out and all will come right. Well, it did in this instance.

My thanks once again to the Autopano community, all of your individual suggestions were tested and a combination of various suggestions provided the results i so desperately needed.

Happy shooting everyone! :)

Edd


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests