Thank you all for your replies! So as now i know that Hugin is capable for this work, I'll try to tune settings for my job and use it in mass processing in january - it's very interesting if i should get results better then from ICE. I'll reply here when i complete the comparison.
I can say that in ICE presence of artifacts is unpredictable - you can get 50 perfect images with thin long lines and 51 will have an artifact - i can't understand why it's happening. Now i also use special table with lined surface to help the program to stitch better, but i want to tune all such a way that lined background won't be neccecary. Im my case overlap is ~30%, image quality is good and i suppose than there are a lot of information to produce prefect stitch. Photoscanning is a good method - even expensive scanners often have CCD sensor and it has problems with black color and contrast is decreased. Modern good CMOS sensors from Sony produce very good image quality - my stitched images are often a way better then images from usually used CCD scanners. Here are my usual results (they are 20 Mp on preview and ~70 Mp when downloading): http://en.herbariumle.ru/?t=occ&s=%22PhotoScan%20D1%22%20%222019-11%22&f=recordCreateInfo -- A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/da6f26a7-fd23-4f25-bfb4-11598dbb44a5%40googlegroups.com.
