In addition to the output size being different, the horizontal field of view is different -- for a.pto it is 360. For b.pto, it is 71. That is probably making a big difference in the final optimized minimum.
On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 9:08:07 AM UTC-8 [email protected] wrote: > If I missed something in the documentation related to this, I'd appreciate > being told where that is. > > How do the Stitcher parameter values modify the action of the Optimizer? > > In experimenting with how well certain actions made a project fit, I was > confused over what seemed to be wildly inconsistent results when I thought > I had repeated the same test. By comparing .pto files I found out which > step was different. But that leaves me not understanding why that step has > this effect. > > So far as I understand, the difference between a.pto and b.pto (both > attached) is just values set on the Stitcher tab. But the optimize results > are slightly different and the report from optimize very different. > [image: a-result.png] > vs. > [image: b-result.png] > The first is quite misleading because stitching shows the fit is pretty > good, but not nearly as good as reported. The actual fit seems to be a bit > better in the second where the optimize result is reported as terrible. > > > -- 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/7beac4a2-41b0-41f4-b16d-70e1dceccbe6n%40googlegroups.com.
