[ptx] re: resolution/size of panoramas

[paul vincent farrell]

Thanks Rob - all is becoming clearer......and yes, my
mistake with the 8000 example - tired and late at
night!

P


--- Rob Park <rbpark at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/24/05, paul vincent farrell
> <paviworld at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I've experimented with this one but can't work it
> out
> > - I wonder what the "size reduction for
> autopano-sift"
> > box in sift-helper actually does - if I start with
> 4
> > images (say) 3000x2000 and use the default of 1600
> > here, am I reducing the panorama size from the
> > expected 3000x8000 down to 1600 (i.e. losing a lot
> of
> > image data), and then later in Hugin if I choose
> > "calculate optimal size" or manually enter 8000,
> am I
> > then only interpolating to a larger size?
> 
> No.
> 
> By setting the size reduction for autopano-sift, you
> are simply
> downsampling the images that autopano-sift works
> with, so that it can
> work faster to create the control points. It has no
> effect on the
> actual images that you are working with.
> 
> And to correct your overlap, the only way you could
> get a 3000x8000
> panorama from four 3000x2000 pictures is if there is
> no overlap, which
> won't actually work because if there's no overlap,
> there's nothing for
> hugin to stitch together. Just hit the "calculate
> optimal size" button
> and that will set it to the proper size so that the
> images aren't
> scaled up nor down.
> 
> --
> Urban Artography
> http://artography.ath.cx
> 



	
		
______________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! for Good 
Donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. 
http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/