Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Resizing Interpolators and which to use???

Expand Messages
  • Fulvio Senore
    ... For PTGui I always use bicubic normal : it is the choice that yields the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and I don t like
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 2 1:24 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Justin Imhoff ha scritto:
      > A question to those of you who may know something about these filters.
      >
      > Which interpolator gives the best results in your experience? Up until now I've been using Sync256 (perhaps unnecessarily) in PTGUI and then appling a smart sharpen in Photoshop. What about the Lanczos filter? Does using this negate having to resharpen in photoshop after? Is this the best choice for Panos?
      >
      For PTGui I always use "bicubic normal": it is the choice that yields
      the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and
      I don't like it. I can alway sharpen later if I like. Don't use the sinc
      interpolators: very large windowed sinc interpolator can cause strange
      things to sharp edges.
      > Then also, when creating the Quicktime in Pano2QTVR, a filter must be chosen here aswell. Is it best to re-use the same filter as before?
      >
      Since the qtvr will only be viewed on the screen I think that a lanczos
      interpolator might be a good option here.
      > There are too many options available and not enough documentation to make an informed decision here. Does it really matter all that much?
      >
      A trained eye can see some difference. I doubt that casual observers
      would notice it.

      Fulvio Senore
    • Justin Imhoff
      There is no bicubic normal option available to me. There s plenty of others though. What about spline36? ... From: Fulvio Senore To:
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 2 7:40 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        There is no bicubic normal option available to me. There's plenty of others though. What about spline36?



        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Fulvio Senore
        To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:24 PM
        Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Resizing Interpolators and which to use???



        Justin Imhoff ha scritto:
        > A question to those of you who may know something about these filters.
        >
        > Which interpolator gives the best results in your experience? Up until now I've been using Sync256 (perhaps unnecessarily) in PTGUI and then appling a smart sharpen in Photoshop. What about the Lanczos filter? Does using this negate having to resharpen in photoshop after? Is this the best choice for Panos?
        >
        For PTGui I always use "bicubic normal": it is the choice that yields
        the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and
        I don't like it. I can alway sharpen later if I like. Don't use the sinc
        interpolators: very large windowed sinc interpolator can cause strange
        things to sharp edges.
        > Then also, when creating the Quicktime in Pano2QTVR, a filter must be chosen here aswell. Is it best to re-use the same filter as before?
        >
        Since the qtvr will only be viewed on the screen I think that a lanczos
        interpolator might be a good option here.
        > There are too many options available and not enough documentation to make an informed decision here. Does it really matter all that much?
        >
        A trained eye can see some difference. I doubt that casual observers
        would notice it.

        Fulvio Senore





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Pat Swovelin
        ... Bicubic normal is only available if you re stitching with PTGui but what would you use if you were stitching with PTGui and warping with Panorama Tools?
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 3 1:45 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On 7/2/2007 1:24 AM, Fulvio Senore rambled on about ...:

          > For PTGui I always use "bicubic normal": it is the choice that yields
          > the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and
          > I don't like it. I can alway sharpen later if I like. Don't use the sinc
          > interpolators: very large windowed sinc interpolator can cause strange
          > things to sharp edges.

          Bicubic normal is only available if you're stitching with PTGui but what
          would you use if you were stitching with PTGui and warping with Panorama
          Tools?




          Pat Swovelin
          Cool Guy @ Large
        • Joost Nieuwenhuijse
          I think Poly3 in PanoTools is more or less the same as Bicubic Normal in PTGui. Joost
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 3 2:13 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            I think Poly3 in PanoTools is more or less the same as Bicubic Normal in
            PTGui.

            Joost

            Pat Swovelin wrote:
            > On 7/2/2007 1:24 AM, Fulvio Senore rambled on about ...:
            >
            >> For PTGui I always use "bicubic normal": it is the choice that yields
            >> the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and
            >> I don't like it. I can alway sharpen later if I like. Don't use the sinc
            >> interpolators: very large windowed sinc interpolator can cause strange
            >> things to sharp edges.
            >
            > Bicubic normal is only available if you're stitching with PTGui but what
            > would you use if you were stitching with PTGui and warping with Panorama
            > Tools?
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Pat Swovelin
            > Cool Guy @ Large
            >
            >
          • Fulvio Senore
            It s a PTGui interpolator, not a PanoTools one. Fulvio Senore
            Message 5 of 10 , Jul 4 9:15 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              It's a PTGui interpolator, not a PanoTools one.

              Fulvio Senore

              Justin Imhoff ha scritto:
              > There is no bicubic normal option available to me. There's plenty of others though. What about spline36?
              >
              >
              >
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: Fulvio Senore
              > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:24 PM
              > Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Resizing Interpolators and which to use???
              >
              >
              >
              > Justin Imhoff ha scritto:
              > > A question to those of you who may know something about these filters.
              > >
              > > Which interpolator gives the best results in your experience? Up until now I've been using Sync256 (perhaps unnecessarily) in PTGUI and then appling a smart sharpen in Photoshop. What about the Lanczos filter? Does using this negate having to resharpen in photoshop after? Is this the best choice for Panos?
              > >
              > For PTGui I always use "bicubic normal": it is the choice that yields
              > the most neutral result. Lanczos creates a slightly sharpened result and
              > I don't like it. I can alway sharpen later if I like. Don't use the sinc
              > interpolators: very large windowed sinc interpolator can cause strange
              > things to sharp edges.
              > > Then also, when creating the Quicktime in Pano2QTVR, a filter must be chosen here aswell. Is it best to re-use the same filter as before?
              > >
              > Since the qtvr will only be viewed on the screen I think that a lanczos
              > interpolator might be a good option here.
              > > There are too many options available and not enough documentation to make an informed decision here. Does it really matter all that much?
              > >
              > A trained eye can see some difference. I doubt that casual observers
              > would notice it.
              >
              > Fulvio Senore
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.