Image-stitching and virtual tour solutions My account Updates
It is currently Thu Oct 30, 2014 4:58 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:14 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
Hello to everybody

First of all: HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

No to my problem, I have a Pano containing 18 RAW images that covers about 180° Landscape.
The Problem is that APG renders them as 360° and then border images are overlapping

Any Idea what I am doing wrong ?

Regards,
Daniel


Attachments:
File comment: Detail from the Editor Window
APG_Pano_Detail.png
APG_Pano_Detail.png [ 728.72 KiB | Viewed 542 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:21 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
mohnid wrote:
Hello to everybody

First of all: HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

No to my problem, I have a Pano containing 18 RAW images that covers about 180° Landscape.
The Problem is that APG renders them as 360° and then border images are overlapping

Any Idea what I am doing wrong ?

Regards,
Daniel

Were your image shots handheld?

Do you really need 18 images to cover approx. 180 HFOV? Is it a single row of images or multiple rows?

How much overlap is there between images? You need 25-30%, more is undesirable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:27 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
mohnid wrote:
Hello to everybody

First of all: HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

No to my problem, I have a Pano containing 18 RAW images that covers about 180° Landscape.
The Problem is that APG renders them as 360° and then border images are overlapping

Any Idea what I am doing wrong ?

Regards,
Daniel


This happens when you set "spherical" in APG´s basic settings and import non-spherical shots. When you shoot a mosaic (rectilinear image) then choose "flat" or "planar" projection in your settings.
But you nevertheless can choose spherical (given you shot around the NPP) - and crop it in the editor. Then make it planar.

Please tell us more about your setup and workflow!

best, Klaus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:35 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
Hi,

Yes I shot them handheld. It's just a simple holiday panorama, all in one row.
There is now problem with stitching, only that image 18 overlaps image 1, but there are no Control Points between image 1 and 18

@klaus: I will check my settings...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:28 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
mohnid wrote:
@klaus: I will check my settings...



When you shot 180° - how would there be controlpoints between the first and the last image?? ;) =D

best, Klaus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 1:43 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
As the pictures have been taken handheld and therefor rotating my body to get the full panorama, they are kind of spherical I suppose...
Now the point is how does APG guess the rotation angle between the images, and why does it think that they should rejoin at the end ?

cheers, Daniel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 1:52 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
mohnid wrote:
As the pictures have been taken handheld and therefor rotating my body to get the full panorama, they are kind of spherical I suppose...

Next time you try handheld rotate your body around the camera rather than rotating the camera around your body. If you see what I mean?

Quote:
Now the point is how does APG guess the rotation angle between the images, and why does it think that they should rejoin at the end ?

cheers, Daniel


If you want to make the image set available for download as ZIP file I'd be happy to have look at what's going on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:18 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
I did a lot of panoramas this way in the last years, normally I don't have any troubles like this.
But maybe it all about my new Camera...

I exported them as jpeg to get a smaller Archive for testing...

You can get the archive here


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 4:20 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
mohnid wrote:
As the pictures have been taken handheld and therefor rotating my body to get the full panorama, they are kind of spherical I suppose...


No - they are "kind of" cylindrical ;) :cool: Onlky when you shoot more than one row it´s spherical.

mohnid wrote:
Now the point is how does APG guess the rotation angle between the images, and why does it think that they should rejoin at the end ?
cheers, Daniel


APG looks for adjacent images and attempts to set control-points in overlapping areas. That makes obvious there need to be enough overlap between adjacent images.
Your image doesn´t provide enough information.

Klaus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 4:41 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
mohnid wrote:
I did a lot of panoramas this way in the last years, normally I don't have any troubles like this.
But maybe it all about my new Camera...

I exported them as jpeg to get a smaller Archive for testing...

You can get the archive here


There's something odd about this image set.

APG makes it a 360 HFOV although there are no links between the first and last image in the row.

Did you really use a focal length of 60mm?


Attachments:
1-apg308-focal60.jpg
1-apg308-focal60.jpg [ 204.38 KiB | Viewed 499 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 7:29 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
I think the focal length of 60mm is correct, thats also why there are so many pictures for 180°.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 9:33 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
I did some more investigation and think that the FOV calculation is incorrect.
Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view I find this:
  • Normal, or Standard lenses (36–60mm in 35mm film format) cover between 62° and 40°
Therefore for 60mm Focal Length should be about 40° and not 42.9 like APG says.
Calculation here gives 39.65°
Should I open a bug report or wait for 3.5beta ?

Cheers Daniel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 9:52 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
mohnid wrote:
I did some more investigation and think that the FOV calculation is incorrect.
Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view I find this:
  • Normal, or Standard lenses (36–60mm in 35mm film format) cover between 62° and 40°
Therefore for 60mm Focal Length should be about 40° and not 42.9 like APG says.
Calculation here gives 39.65°
Should I open a bug report or wait for 3.5beta ?

Cheers Daniel


That's not the cause of the problem.

I split your image set into two groups and in each case the HFOV was calculated as being close to or more than 180 degrees.

If you think that's not correct then ask Kolor what is going on.


Attachments:
1-apg308-archiv.jpg
1-apg308-archiv.jpg [ 180.14 KiB | Viewed 475 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 10:16 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
There is something pecuilair about this image set and the way APG handles it.

The EXIF shows you used a 24-105mm lens - so why on earth you chose to shoot with a focal length of 60mm (according to the EXIf) is beyond me.

You also appear to have used autoexposure which is not recommended when shooting panos, but that's beside the point here. As is my impression that the scene is quite devoid of anything of interest.

What's odd is that APG 3.0.8 sometimes appears to think the focal length is 30mm not 60mm as recorded in the EXIF; yet another time it thinks it is 60mm.

I don't know why that should be.

Nor do I understand why - in the instance illustrated below - APG gets the pano FOV completely wrong, and equally wrong, when use all 18 images or only the last 10.


Attachments:
1-apg-archiv-02-panofov.jpg
1-apg-archiv-02-panofov.jpg [ 140.06 KiB | Viewed 472 times ]
1-archive-02-focal60.jpg
1-archive-02-focal60.jpg [ 90.24 KiB | Viewed 473 times ]
2-archive-02-focal60.jpg
2-archive-02-focal60.jpg [ 92.01 KiB | Viewed 473 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:53 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:12 pm
Posts: 14063
Location: Isleham, Cambridgeshire, UK.
FWIW PTGui seemed to be able to handle it:


Attachments:
1ptgui-stitch.jpg
1ptgui-stitch.jpg [ 77.55 KiB | Viewed 465 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:44 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 17
@mediavets thank you for investigating some time on my problem.

I opened a bug report for this problem, lets see what can be done...

Regards
Daniel


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group