Hot answers tagged

14

Using Hugin Yes, since Google PhotoSphere panos are stored as equirectangular projections you can use Hugin to remap to other projections. Go into the View → Advanced (or Expert) mode. Click the Add Images... button to load the stitched panorama. Set the Lens type to Equirectangular and the HFOV to 360. This will load your 360x180 as a 360x180. ...


11

Many people use Hugin to do not just panostitching, but also exposure stacking (for high-dyanmic range (HDR) or exposure fusion) at the same time. Stitching 360x180 panoramas shot outside almost inevitably means you have the sun in your shot and are covering a very large dynamic range, so pano shooters were among the first users to do HDR processing. So, ...


9

I think you should, in fact, use the slightly-smaller value. That's not because I've measured, but because I can resolve the apparent contradiction from exiftool: it's showing you a rounded value. Try giving it the -n flag, to disable what exiftool calls "print conversion": $ exiftool -n -ScaleFactor35efl sample.jpg Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent: 0....


9

Increase the number of control points. The standard is eight (-c 8). Raise this number to 20, 50, 100 or even 500. You will not get a worse result because of that - align_image_stack will just use (much) more time. A good time for a coffee break! Play around with the required correlation between control points. The standard value is --corr=0.9, so if ...


7

Question: How do photographers usualy make rivers in gigapixel photos? Answer: They buy a Gigapan robot which shoots a structured panorama, i.e. a regular one in say a 5x5 grid and then use the software that came with their robot to merge the images. Having said that though, if you have such a structured layout, you could use Microsoft ICE just as well (as ...


6

No, you need to enter either the field of view (FOV), or the lens and crop factor information. Luckily for you, for the Apollo mission images, the camera and lens information is well documented. The still photos taken by the lunar module team were taken exclusively by Hasselblad cameras modified to accept 70 mm film backs (56mm frame size, 1:1 image ratio), ...


6

In the Mask tab you can select regions of the picture that you don't want Hugin to use in the final panorama. You just have to be careful to not mask out a part of the panorama that only exists in that low-res picture, because then you will get a hole.


4

It seems that this is what the template feature is for. How can I reuse a project as a template? If you copy a .pto project to a different folder and open it with hugin, you will be prompted for the 'missing' images. You should delete any control points from this template project since they won't be relevant to the new photos. Alternatively you can ...


4

Have you looked at the stitching flat scanned images tutorial for Hugin? Summarizing the tutorial: set the horizontal field of view to 10 degrees with crop factor = 1.0x assign each image a different lens number create control points as you usually do (manually or automatically) optimize roll, x, y and z for all images except your anchor image (do not ...


4

The command line you typed for celeste should work. What I would look into next is: Confirm that the file celeste.model is in the same folder as celeste_standalone.exe Look from what path you are calling it, and possibly adding the hugin\bin folder in the path for your command line 'SET PATH=%PATH%;c:\huginFolder\bin' Having it in the bin saved me from ...


4

Your lens should be marked as "Normal" in Hugin, and the focal length multiplier of your camera is 1.0. The auto-alignment in Hugin can be frustrating at times. I have found that the wider the field of view the more difficult it is for Hugin to align images. There are also a few different algorithms that you can choose to automatically select and align ...


4

What you're missing is a lot of scene coverage. To get a 360ºx180º full spherical view, you have to cover the entire sphere. Without a fisheye lens, this is likely to mean multiple rows as well as a zenith and nadir shot, with precise coverage. In hardware terms, this probably means you need a panohead on a tripod--or at least a plumbline--to make sure ...


4

Broken-Line stitching errors There may be no way to fix these in Hugin itself, as it's very probable you have a parallax issue when shooting. If you do not rotate the camera/lens combination precisely around the no-parallax point (NPP), particularly in smaller enclosed spaces, then you are creating issues that no stitcher can fix with any amount of warping,...


4

The pto files produced by Hugin are basically just configuration files. Some programs, such as Hugin itself, may be able to open the files and allow you to preview something that resembles what the final panorama may eventually look like, but because it is not the finished panorama, the preview will only roughly approximate the final output. Generally, pto ...


3

It's hard to tell, but it looks like in the stitched image your camera might have been aimed slightly above the horizon in at least 2 of the unstitched shots. By aiming up a little bit, the horizon at the widest part of your image "curls upwards" somewhat. This effect is similar to barrel distortion, and is more prominent with wider fields of view (shorter ...


3

If you use 6.03 for the Focal length multiplier field you should be good to go. The Sony PowerShot DSC T-100 lists the 5.8-29mm focal length as 35 equivalent to 35-175mm. This figures out to 6.035, but the 1/2.5" sensor of your camera is in a 4:3 ratio instead of the standard 35mm 3:2 ratio. The diagonal of a standard 35mm film frame divided by the 7.18mm ...


3

From http://hugin.sourceforge.net/docs/manual/Hugin_Control_Points_table.html: Distance, the distance in pixels between a perfect alignment and the actual alignment achieved by the optimiser. Otherwise, after selecting Fine-tune all Points from the Edit menu, this column shows the correlation between the points (0.0 indicates no correlation and 1.00 ...


3

Looking at the last result, I think that's as good as you'll get modifying each set, so I would do as you suggest and use a radial gradient. To select grey to white, rather than black to white, set your foreground/background colors to grey and white before selecting the gradient tool. Or you can use black/white, set blending mode to overlay and use layer ...


3

I got it to work. I had two trials. First, I looked for a similar situation among my existing files, I found three from the same perspective at different focal lengths. They were much closer than your range, though (18mm to 55mm). Hugin could read the EXIF data and adjusted horizontal field of view (hfov, parameter v) accordingly. Then I simulated your ...


3

My two cents. 1) Take a look at blender to stabilize video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU8zqn091rM 2) Do shorter pices of video at a time. Try for example doing sequences of 30-45 frames. 3) Use one frame as a reference to stabilize the rest. So you have a frame 1 on all the aditional sequences. You can remove this repeating frame after. 4) You now ...


3

Using align_image_stack, there is no need to load all the images at once. The whole point is to remap the images to one target image, so if image nr. 1 is your anchor image you can just load that image and another one, get that one aligned to the anchor and then you repeat this to process for your next image. This can be automated using a suitable script ...


3

You don't have sufficient scene coverage for an equirectangular. 360x180 coverage means you took enough photos and stitched to cover the entire sphere. If you didn't point your camera straight up and straight down at any point to take a member image, you have no coverage of the zenith (top) and nadir (bottom) of the sphere, which is why those areas are black ...


3

Your question is not clear because we do not really know what you have, but if your image is misaligned because you did not use a panorama head, you can not correct it. Take a look at this: Do I "need" a panoramic head to shoot 360 panoramas?


3

After some more studying the program and testing around I finally got it to work! Here is every step I took: Launch Hugin (version 2019.0.0.a369cbe55179, on Manjaro Linux); Interface menu > Expert; In the Photos tab, add images (In my case they are a 3x4 grid, all are 1920x1080, but I have also tried a set of images that don't have a clear shape after ...


2

The answer to your question is this. It is possible to stitch an equirectangular panorama or a stereographic projection from handheld offset images but you are likely to end up with problems like the one in your images, especially when you are that close to things you are photographing. You see the problem with the ceiling may not necessarily be connected ...


2

Try using Darktable instead. The 'lens correction' module shown above should help remove the fisheye effect. If your lens is in the database it can automatically make the correction, or if not you may adjust manually.


2

Straight line features apply to a single image. You set your view to have the same image on the left and right and set the two end points. If you have three images, you'll do this once for each image.


2

My guess is that you're not taking care to keep your camera level/consistent in pitch. When you change the orientation of the camera between member shots, you can get errors like this. I'd highly recommend shooting with a two or three-axis spirit level on the hotshoe. Most cameras will only show you if you're level in roll, not in roll and pitch.


2

The issue may be the size of the images, you're doing images which are 4000x3000, which is considerably larger than 4k resolution, batch scaling your images to a more manageable size before loading into the software may make it finish faster (using less resources). If you plan to turn this into a video, then think practically about where it will be shared, ...


2

As suggested by @HarryHarrison, batch export the images in substantially smaller size like 600x400 and in 8 bit per channel. At least as a test. This will require 50-100x less memory. Repeat your program tests on that size - it should run way faster and should finish. If you have plenty of memory, the small images will process possibly 50 x faster, but I ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible