Before coming back here, and reading that I needed to set the interface to "Expert" to get the translation parameters, I found no way to add them, and just did the Lens b parameter, and got a perfect result! (see new image added to the imgur page) (Maybe TOO perfect - I'm not sure that it might not look better slightly tilted away towards the top - after all, I AM looking up at the top of the building from the bottom... What do people think! This is just aesthetics, of course... I probably won't bother, unless the consensus is to tilt it.)
On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:12:32 AM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote: > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 at 11:46, [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 5:52:13 AM UTC-5 [email protected] >> wrote: >> >>> >>> The XYZ Translation parameters are initially hidden as they are not >>> needed for normal usage, they are made available by selecting Menu -> >>> Interface -> Expert. >>> >>> That is one of the reasons I think only the "Expert" interface is usable. >> >> I understand the concept that the alignment doesn't need to be great: >> The blending tools can cover up for poor alignment. But I've never seen >> that work for any of my panoramas. I have sometimes used detailed masks to >> cover up for poor alignment. But otherwise, poor alignment gives a >> terrible result. >> > > The reason why it is hidden is that although it accounts for 3D movement > of the camera, it is only really useful for assembling an image of a flat > surface (like the facade of a building), it isn't generally useful for > assembling a 'normal' panorama. > > With a normal panorama you might find that occasionally adding the X, Y, Z > parameters to the optimisation helps get a better fit, but really you are > just substituting for the lack of morph to fit functionality, rather than > calculating the 'actual' values for these parameters. > > >> As for the lens, I noticed the slight barrel shape of the parallel >> vertical lines in the original two photos of this thread. I don't know >> whether to consider that a lens characteristic different from the default >> "rectilinear": The part of such parallel lines that are perpendicular to >> the point of view are wider apart in viewing angle, and the viewing angle >> between the lines goes down with the distance from that perpendicular. But >> those two photos both had the camera pointing up relative to the face of >> the building. The perpendicular point is at the bottom of the lower >> picture. So the visible slight bulge in parallel vertical lines looks to >> me like it is closer to the vertical center of the image, which would >> definitely be a lens characteristic, as opposed to representing the actual >> point of widest viewing angle between the lines (which I don't know whether >> that would also be a lens characteristic different from "rectilinear"). >> > > The barrel distortion is normal with any lens, and is accounted-for in the > a,b & c (and d & e) lens parameters. Though in general you should only need > to use the 'b' parameter for a rectilinear lens. > > -- > Bruno > > > -- > Bruno > -- 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/23111f76-70dd-4b85-9a57-dc0cdc22b15an%40googlegroups.com.
