Proxy editing small pics then rendered on full size. .  

Got some great idea or a feature request? Post it here and discuss it. The most requested concepts are usually implemented, as Autopano Pro / Giga is very community driven.
no avatar
neweramike
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:35 pm
Info

Proxy editing small pics then rendered on full size. .

by neweramike » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:18 pm

Now that cameras are creating bigger files, exponentially more difficult and slower to work with.
Why not use small images to create the the projects and control points. The renders for the process would work fast on small images, The FINAL render would work on full size source pictures.

I do this now by working with small images to decide what to use. Then I have to start all over (PAIN IN THE ***!) to work with the full size images.

Here is how it would be done

The control points X,Y would be modified by (small source pictures x,y dimensions MOD - Delta, full size x,y dimensions)

I did this 20 years ago with my automatic target mapping tool for interactive movie mapping in La Paz Bolivia in Hypercard.

Advantage,, HUGE time saving in work flow.
Currently, Autopano has trouble with very large source pictures.

I am moving to 21 megapixel cameras as soon as Autopano can do this.

no avatar
GURL
Member
 
Posts: 2943
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:57 pm
Location: Grenoble
Info

by GURL » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:35 pm

neweramike wrote:Now that cameras are creating bigger files, exponentially more difficult and slower to work with.

;) The principle behind stitchers is to assemble several small images to get a single larger one...

For a given number of pixels in the resulting image, having more pixels in each source image should result in faster or at least not slower stitching. For example stitching two 24MP images should be equivalent to stitch four 12MP images or eight 6MP images (that is equivalent final image quality provided the lens is good enough plus its FOV wide enough and a not larger rendering time.)

One should move to a 24MP camera only if needing more pixels and being able to afford not only the camera but the corresponding super high quality lenses, tripod, panohead and the matched backpack.

As experience shows that we usually want more pixels, the point could be whether or not "extrapolating" a given project file (.pano) from 6MP source files to 24MP source files would result in a good enough final image: I would not be surprised of the answer being "yes" because more than often stitching errors in the final result are visible in the smaller previews but then... well, I wonder whether we really need this larger amount of pixels ;)
Georges

no avatar
JohnM
Member
 
Posts: 188
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:47 pm
Info

by JohnM » Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:11 pm

Theres a zooming revolution coming GURL so we want as high angular pixel density (pixels/degree) as possible.

no avatar
neweramike
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:35 pm
Info

by neweramike » Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:54 am

No GURL, your reply is full of incorrect assumptions in my case. 1. I do not shoot on the nodal point. 2. regarding this issue I do not shoot panoramas but linear panoramas. 3. My work is very highly zoomable. Much of the work I have seen, you can zoom in from very far but have nothing really to see... My work is designed to be zoomed and connected for further interaction.

Yes JohnM You are exactly on track.

I am trying to work one a scale that is 20x larger at least, and printed full resolution onto buildings.

Mike

User avatar
DrSlony
Moderator
 
Posts: 1893
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:30 pm
Location: Sweden
Info

by DrSlony » Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:31 am

If you want to stitch miniature images that are 1/8th the size of their original counterparts and then to apply those CPs to the full-size images, you will get a pano with 8 (~) times as large stitching errors...

no avatar
foundation
Member
 
Posts: 276
Likes: 3 posts
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:43 am
Info

by foundation » Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:24 pm

but if you just want to process the photos to find which photos in a folder go together in a pano, 8x stitching errors would be fine. I wish the browse folder functionality could just use embedded thumbnails in RAW to do that rather than decoding the full size.

no avatar
neweramike
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:35 pm
Info

by neweramike » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:17 am

foundation wrote:but if you just want to process the photos to find which photos in a folder go together in a pano, 8x stitching errors would be fine. I wish the browse folder functionality could just use embedded thumbnails in RAW to do that rather than decoding the full size.

All of my final full size stitched images are TIFF>. Raw correction and conversion is done in Lightroom. My issue is the SHEER HIGH NUMBER of NON NODAL POINT panoramas.. Linear Panoramas underwater. I am shooting 3000-4000 pictures a day when I am on the reef in production.

Having the ability to search for groups, and adjust, position, rotation, FOV quickly on smaller files then execute that general information on much larger files in a batch would be very important.
AUTOPANO is NOT only standard spinning pictures... Think out of the cube.. lol,.

Any questions please ask.

Mike

no avatar
JohnM
Member
 
Posts: 188
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:47 pm
Info

by JohnM » Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:29 pm

@neweramike I`d like to get in touch about the underwater workflow. The same issues come up when shooting gigapixels from helicopter.

My issue is mostly to get quick feedback when shooting. I guess some script to group pictures by series ( from exif data ) in folders with a batch resizer would be helpful. Then the folders with downsampled images may be quick stitched in APP, and the folders picked for production could be stitched over night. Thats should speed up production.

I`ve only seen the work of Jim Hellemn when it comes to hires underwater images, do you have any urls to share ?



john(dot)myrstad(at)gmail(dot)com


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron