Klaus, I'm curious. I've seen you mention this RMS of 1 before. I've played with this a bit, and while I can get down very close to an RMS of one, (and while I completely agree with you about the many hours of photoshop time being wasted with a high RMS number), I also end up losing many of the control points to get down to an RMS of 1. if I can get 2000-3000 control points and an RMS of around 2 I'm quite happy. while I can spend another 30 minutes getting the RMS down to 1, I end up losing at least half of those control points, and then seeing errors in other places . there has to be a trade off between the "perfect RMS" number and a good spread of control points..... right?
What i said is a - my
- "rule of thumb". I - i
- realized that having max. around RMS 1 leads to the best results.
Usually the results are not related direcly to the number of CPs
. You do not need to have thousands of CPs between the images. You only need the right ones.
Optimizing in APG can be be a kind of art sometimes . .
I could not reveal how to manage to reach a number on RMS1 in APG 3.5 . . . . the best i achieve is around 2. And that´s not perfect with 700MPx when you zoom in.
So at the moment i use 3.0.8 as long as i´m a bit more familiar with 3.5 and find how to achieve around a RMS of 1.
3.5 maybe providing better automatic quality - i don´t care - but going deeper in it working manually it starts just confusing me. Documentation traditionally is . . . well.