[ptx] Wished feature

[JD Smith]

>  JD> Then you could eliminate the "Fit" and "Center" buttons in the preview
>  JD> pane, since by default the image would both fit and be centered (I'm not
>  JD> sure anyone would ever want an off-center pano with black space to one
>  JD> side; I tend to hit those fit and re-center buttons alot).  A question
> 
> If you are correcting for parallax (one image pano project) you might
> end with a very high pitch, and nothing underneath.  At least with
> cropped tiffs you don't get a lot of black output in the file.

Right, but for partial panos, I doubt anybody would ever want an image
ranging from -100 to 100, but with the actual pano occurring at say, -90
to 20 degrees.  The left/right centering is superfluous, for this
reason.  Black space for PITCH is understandable.  Black space for YAW
is just a nuisance, IMO.  Granted, it's a nuisance which can be
eliminated by hitting all of the magic optimize buttons, but why not
just cut that step out altogether?

>  JD> remains on what to do as the pitch is changed... expand the vertical
>  JD> extent of the preview window in real time?  
> 
> Why don't we assume (at least in the first implementation) that the
> photo is 360/180 degrees?

Maybe if it's 360 x something you could assume this, but for panos which
are say 75x30 (zoomed panos for high resolution), or for "shift and
align" type applications, this would not be usable.  This might be not
be a strange as it sounds, since (in my concept of this) you wouldn't
allow yaw adjustments (which are arbitrary) unless the image is a full
360 degrees.  So there's a special "360" mode which shows 360x180 and
allows all three layout properties to be interactively changed.  For
partial panos, the same basic interface as present, except YAW is fixed,
and is centered on the pano center, with a size "just large enough" to
accommodate the full pano.  This would cut out some of the non-intuitive
center/estimate optimal size/etc.  By default, the size would be
"optimal", unless you specifically alter it.

Thanks,

JD