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

Re: Enblend 3.0 memory problem

Expand Messages
  • Hans Nyberg
    ... I believe that is the same as the one at Kekus.com. Both Created and modified 05/02/07 Hans Only difference is that mine says 15.41 which I assume has to
    Message 1 of 18 , Nov 30, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bruno Postle <bruno@...> wrote:
      >
      > On Fri 30-Nov-2007 at 23:36 -0000, Hans Nyberg wrote:
      > >--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bruno Postle <bruno@> wrote:
      > >>
      > >> It is possible it is some compilation or library problem. There is
      > >> another enblend-3.0 in the hugin OS X bundle, you could try that and
      > >> report if it makes any difference.
      > >
      > >There is no Hugin OSX Enblend version.
      >
      > Ok, try the one at the bottom of this page instead:
      >
      > http://homepage.mac.com/ippei_ukai/software/

      I believe that is the same as the one at Kekus.com.

      Both Created and modified 05/02/07

      Hans


      Only difference is that mine says 15.41 which I assume has to do with summertime.
    • Bruno Postle
      ... I guess that is all there is, sorry for leading you on a fruitless chase. -- Bruno
      Message 2 of 18 , Nov 30, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri 30-Nov-2007 at 23:55 -0000, Hans Nyberg wrote:
        >> >--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bruno Postle <bruno@> wrote:
        >>
        >> Ok, try the one at the bottom of this page instead:
        >>
        >> http://homepage.mac.com/ippei_ukai/software/
        >
        >I believe that is the same as the one at Kekus.com.
        >
        >Both Created and modified 05/02/07

        I guess that is all there is, sorry for leading you on a fruitless
        chase.

        --
        Bruno
      • Hans Nyberg
        ... Well Thanks anyway, at least I know the author now. I have to say I find it very weird that the development of a component like Enblend is taken care of by
        Message 3 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bruno Postle <bruno@...> wrote:
          >
          > On Fri 30-Nov-2007 at 23:55 -0000, Hans Nyberg wrote:
          > >> >--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Bruno Postle <bruno@> wrote:
          > >>
          > >> Ok, try the one at the bottom of this page instead:
          > >>
          > >> http://homepage.mac.com/ippei_ukai/software/
          > >
          > >I believe that is the same as the one at Kekus.com.
          > >
          > >Both Created and modified 05/02/07
          >
          > I guess that is all there is, sorry for leading you on a fruitless
          > chase.

          Well Thanks anyway, at least I know the author now.
          I have to say I find it very weird that the development of a component like Enblend is
          taken care of by just a couple of people who just do it for fun.
          And it is even difficult for people without insight in it to find the download.

          Enblend is a vital part of both Stitcher and PTMac

          Stitcher is unusesable without Enblend or Smartblend. (Unless the last updater has done
          something revolutionary.) PTMac's own blender is of the same kind.

          With PTGui you can get a 50% boost in speed by using Enblend 3.0 and with mostly the
          same identical blending result.

          RealViz should pay at least 20% of each Stitcher sale to the developers of Enblend and
          Smartblend to keep making them even better.

          Just take a look at Photoshop's autoblend feature which is even faster and with similar or
          better results than Smartblend.

          Hans
        • dmgalpha
          ... component like Enblend is ... the download. ... I find it weird that you find it weird. A lot of open source and free software is build in the spare time
          Message 4 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            > Well Thanks anyway, at least I know the author now.
            > I have to say I find it very weird that the development of a
            component like Enblend is
            > taken care of by just a couple of people who just do it for fun.
            > And it is even difficult for people without insight in it to find
            the download.
            >

            I find it weird that you find it weird. A lot of open source and free
            software is build in the spare time of their developers.

            I spent several hours today trying to compile the latest enblend under
            OS X. I now have an info file for fink and a tar source file with the
            latest CVS if anybody wants to compile it (and has a properly
            configured unstable branch of fink 10.4).

            --
            daniel m. german
            silvernegative.com
          • Hans Nyberg
            ... If I had any idea what you are talking about I suppose i would say that this sounds great. Hans
            Message 5 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "dmgalpha" <dmgerman@...> wrote:

              > I spent several hours today trying to compile the latest enblend under
              > OS X. I now have an info file for fink and a tar source file with the
              > latest CVS if anybody wants to compile it (and has a properly
              > configured unstable branch of fink 10.4).
              >

              If I had any idea what you are talking about I suppose i would say that this sounds great.

              Hans
            • Yuval Levy
              ... unfortunately the spirit of open source is not immediately clear to people who have been educated to shell out hundreds of dollars for proprietary
              Message 6 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                dmgalpha wrote:
                > I find it weird that you find it weird. A lot of open source and free
                > software is build in the spare time of their developers.

                unfortunately the spirit of open source is not immediately clear to
                people who have been educated to shell out hundreds of dollars for
                proprietary software.


                > I spent several hours today trying to compile the latest enblend under
                > OS X. I now have an info file for fink and a tar source file with the
                > latest CVS if anybody wants to compile it (and has a properly
                > configured unstable branch of fink 10.4).

                thanks for your contribution, Daniel. I have documented it on
                http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_Compiling_OSX

                those who have Macs out there - the developers of both hugin and enblend
                need your feedback. please take the time to read the above page and try
                to follow the instructions. if you bump into problems, they are most
                likely unknown to the developers and won't be fixed unless you
                communicate that the problems exist.

                don't expect much, though. since you are not paying for this, no open
                source contributor will feel obliged to reply to your requests.
                formulating them nicely might help.

                Yuv
              • AYRTON - avi
                ... So Hans you re saying that it s probably a good idea to use it with my ptgui pro instead of the 1.3 or the 2.5 version that I m using now ... On this the
                Message 7 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 12/1/07, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:

                  > With PTGui you can get a 50% boost in speed by using Enblend 3.0 and with mostly the
                  > same identical blending result.
                  >

                  So Hans you're saying that it's probably a good idea to use it with my
                  ptgui pro instead of the 1.3 or the 2.5 version that I'm using now
                  ???


                  > Just take a look at Photoshop's autoblend feature which is even faster and with similar or
                  > better results than Smartblend.

                  On this the way to go is ask for a layers output from ptgui and them
                  blend it using CS3 autoblend ???
                  I've tried once and I did not like the result, but I'll give it another try.

                  AYRTON

                  >
                  > Hans
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  --
                  AYRTON 21-9982.6313 www.ayrton.com
                  Ladeira de Nossa Senhora, 214 / sl. 101 www.vrfolio.com
                  Outeiro da Glória - RJ - 22211-100 - Brasil www.vr-images.com
                  Panoramas do Rio de Janeiro www.rio360.com.br
                • Hans Nyberg
                  ... the ... If you have a new Intel machine it may be much larger than 50% Enblend 3.0 for Mac is universal. Here are some new speedtests I just made. MacBook
                  Message 8 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "AYRTON - avi" <avi@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > On 12/1/07, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > With PTGui you can get a 50% boost in speed by using Enblend 3.0 and with mostly
                    the
                    > > same identical blending result.
                    > >
                    >
                    > So Hans you're saying that it's probably a good idea to use it with my
                    > ptgui pro instead of the 1.3 or the 2.5 version that I'm using now
                    > ???
                    If you have a new Intel machine it may be much larger than 50%

                    Enblend 3.0 for Mac is universal.

                    Here are some new speedtests I just made.

                    MacBook Pro 2.16 dualcore 2gb ram
                    Standard 5400 RPM Harddisc
                    8 images Canon 5D + 15mm fisheye
                    Full output 11500x5750
                    Speedtest at 6000x3000 16 bit output as blended tif.

                    PTGui Warp + PTGui Blend
                    10 minutes (average of 3 times)

                    PTGui Warp + Enblend with 1500 mb Ram applied
                    4.40 minutes (average of 3 times)

                    With a 7200 RPM disc both get a 20% boost
                    The only major problem with Enblend is thelack of blending over the edge at zenith (and
                    nadir of couse but thats not important.)
                    This is only a problem with full fisheye 180 degree images without a zenith image.
                    Or if you do multirow and take the top row images with blending over the zenith.

                    This has been a known problem all years I have known Enblend. It could without doubt
                    have been solved but this is an Open source project and nothing happens really.

                    There is almost no activity around enblend development.

                    The special 1.3 version which is very fast compared to the 2.5 is slower than 3.0.

                    I have done tests on the full 11500 pixels output from the same project but only on my G5

                    PTguiWarp + Blend 31 minutes
                    PTGui Warp + Enblend 1.3 26 minutes
                    PTGuiWarp + Enblend 3.0 19.20 minutes

                    One of the main reason why PTgui is slower is the colorcorrection which is made together
                    with its own blending. Especially with 16 bit images it increases the warp time with more
                    than 100%
                    When you export to Enblend it does just the warping.

                    Hans
                  • Erik Krause
                    ... As far as I heard Andrew Mihal got a job soon after he released version 3.0 and since then only the hugin community felt responsible for the project.
                    Message 9 of 18 , Dec 1, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Saturday, December 01, 2007 at 21:06, Hans Nyberg wrote:

                      > This has been a known problem all years I have known Enblend. It could
                      > without doubt have been solved but this is an Open source project and
                      > nothing happens really.

                      As far as I heard Andrew Mihal got a job soon after he released
                      version 3.0 and since then only the hugin community felt responsible
                      for the project. However, remember the story of smartblend? Mike
                      originally wanted to make it commercially available and no one was
                      interested: http://www.panotools.org/mailarchive/msg/29296 If he gets
                      a good job, smartblend will be lost to community, since the source
                      code is not available, so be grateful enblend is at least open
                      source.

                      Could very well be enblend would never have been written if it was
                      intended as a commercial project. So please instead of to nag about
                      those lazy open source developers lets go ahead and encourage them to
                      improve their programs not only by using them but by giving
                      productive feedback and by supporting their efforts wherever
                      possible. Especially you, Hans, shouldn't have been missing on the
                      panotools google summer of code supporters list:
                      http://wiki.panotools.org/SoC2007_Supporters

                      may be next year...

                      best regards
                      --
                      http://www.erik-krause.de
                    • Eric O'Brien
                      Enblend can be found at Compiled versions for Windows, plus source. Click Download and choose Browse All Files.
                      Message 10 of 18 , Dec 10, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Enblend can be found at <http://sourceforge.net/projects/enblend/>

                        Compiled versions for Windows, plus source.

                        Click "Download" and choose "Browse All Files." Then the page loads,
                        scroll down a bit.

                        The newest files in this package are dated January 27, 2007.


                        MacPorts has version 2.5.

                        Fink has a version called "3.0-11"

                        eo



                        On Dec 1, 2007, at 3:26 AM, dmgalpha wrote:

                        >
                        >> Well Thanks anyway, at least I know the author now.
                        >> I have to say I find it very weird that the development of a
                        > component like Enblend is
                        >> taken care of by just a couple of people who just do it for fun.
                        >> And it is even difficult for people without insight in it to find
                        > the download.
                        >>
                        >
                        > I find it weird that you find it weird. A lot of open source and free
                        > software is build in the spare time of their developers.
                        >
                        > I spent several hours today trying to compile the latest enblend under
                        > OS X. I now have an info file for fink and a tar source file with the
                        > latest CVS if anybody wants to compile it (and has a properly
                        > configured unstable branch of fink 10.4).
                        >
                        > --
                        > daniel m. german
                        > silvernegative.com
                        >
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.