AlexandreJ wrote:I really hope that you are kidding, mediavets.
Nevertheless, this case is easy. The ghost is appearing on the edge. Just do a yaw + 50, render again and done.
case A : The antighost should be totally determistic in engine v2.5
mediavets wrote:I'm just reporting my experience comparing the peformance of V2.5 Antighost and V2.0.9 with Smartblend with this image set.
AlexandreJ wrote:mediavets wrote:I'm just reporting my experience comparing the peformance of V2.5 Antighost and V2.0.9 with Smartblend with this image set.
Sure, in this example the old smartblend works better. But I think I found the issue in the new engine in fact.
We forget to put back the code that handles ghost over 360° edges. This code were in the 2.0.9 engine and probably forgot in the new engine.
Issue 405 opened
mediavets wrote:OK - so just maybe it was worth my reporting my experiences?
AlexandreJ wrote:Interesting case. But this time, it's not that relevant
You did a panorama with a really wrong color correction. Or this has an influence on the antighost algorithm, because that algorithm is based on a rule that try to find path that will have the lowest visual difference. Or if these differences are modified by a too strong color cast ( coming from color correction in this case ), it won't find the right path.
I redid the same panorama without color correction and with a good color correction, and both leads to the right rendering.
Let's keep that in mind : badly color corrected panorama can change the result of the antighost algorithm.
mediavets wrote:OK - so colour correction and antighost interact and are in some way mutually dependent? So that if colour correction is not set/working properly then antighost will fail. Is that a corrcet imterpreration of you comments?
mediavets wrote:I assumed that the default colour correction settings would be most appropriate for most panos? Perhaps not?
How did my colour settings become 'really wrong' when I was using the defaults? Are the defaults set incorrectly? Have I inadvertently changed the defaults without having been aware of doing so?
mediavets wrote:What colour correction should I have set to get this scene to stitch properly as you have done?
mediavets wrote:Does one have to change the sdetting for colour correction depending on some pre-stitch assessment of the image set? If so, how? What are the rules/metrics one should employ to ensure reliable results?
mediavets wrote:How do all those possible colour correction settings relate to None/LDR/HDR? That system I more or less understood, or rather I became familiar with how it behaved. This new system I find quite incomprehensible and quite unpredicatble to the point of being unsable and many times the defaults produce completely bizarre and unacceptable results, which are nowhere near as good as I got from APG 2.0.9 without any 'monekeying about'.
I have had many instances where colour correction didn't seem to work at all and I just ended up with a brown/grey mess; screenshots posted by others suggest that I am not alone in having this experience.
What are the 'tiricks' one must employ to get colour correction to work properly?
'[bo wrote:']I thing a big part of the problem is the color correction bug in beta2. Andrew is right that there's a problem, however the whole "new smartblend sucks / old rocks / v2.5 is stupid"-thing is based on testing a beta version! Many of the heated comments in this and other threads seem to disregard this simple fact. Which makes me nervous
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests