Re: How control points are determined in bracketed shots using PTGUI
- Sorry, but that wouldn't help much because you'd have to approach and
leave the camera for every single shot. Every move you make can (and
will) disturb the position of the camera under such circumstances.
Because the combined center of gravity of the camera + panohead is
never aligned with the vertical axis of rotation of the tripod some
displacement will always occur when the tripod is not stable enough,
therefore even a remotely controlled rotator might not prevent errors
- Hi Hans,
I do realise the context or Carel's statement but I'm sick of wasting
my time defending comments made on forums and email lists that
ultimately have nothing to do with our products. My new tactic is to
clarify any comments when and where they're made. Hopefully I won't
have to explain to 20 people individually that you can in-fact use a
360precision set-up on carpet. A lot of the time people don't realise
how highly regarded comments on lists like this are taken, whether
they're correct or not.
The thing is Hans, you may realise what Carel meant. Believe me
though, there are a lot of people that will take his statement to mean
you can't use 360Precision with a template when shooting on carpet and
this is b.s.
Like I said, if you guys are having problems don't blame the head or
the carpet, blame your set-up or technique. Personally I've shot
hundreds of locations for real estate tours with 1-2 templates and
have not noticed any major problems. And I've shot rooms with carpet,
tiles, floorboards, slate, glass, I've even shot in swimming pools and
A large part of this comes down to understanding how precise you
actually need to be when shooting.
On 2 Dec 2007, at 12:06, Hans Nyberg wrote:
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Matthew Rogers <matthew@...>
> > Hi Carel,
> > I normally try and stay out of these debates but making such a broad
> > sweeping statement about the 360Precision head is simply not
> > acceptable.
> Carel is in no way saying anything about the precision of the
> He just says that there are other factors which can very easy change
> this precision.
> I just did a very simple test.
> My floor is standard 22mm plates with a carpet on and I placed my
> large heavy Manfrotto
> tripod 058 on it.
> I took a monopod and fastened it at a stable shelf 1,5 m from the
> tripod and moved it
> until it almost touched the top of the tripod vertical pole.
> The movement when walking around as you would normally do for taking
> the panorama
> was 1mm.
> That means that you get different pitches on the images and using
> template stitching will
> give you errors.
> And that has nothing to do with the panohead.
> You say the same yourself below so why are you complaining.
- On Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 12:39, erik leeman wrote:
> Sorry, but that wouldn't help much because you'd have to approach andI don't see that as pessimistic as you. Although it won't help under
> leave the camera for every single shot.
certain circumstances, it might well help to use a self timer and
walk away under other ones - f.e. in case of an elastic wooden floor.
And there certainly are other possibilities, like f.e. to weigh the
tripod down by hanging a heavy bag under it etc...
BTW.: I (and many others too) would appreciate if you quote what you
refer to. It makes reading of an answer much easier if the context is
known. For details please see:
- Sometime around 2/12/07 (at 12:54 +0000) Matthew Rogers said:
>I've shot rooms with carpet,Interesting list!
>tiles, floorboards, slate, glass, I've even shot in swimming pools and
My personal more extreme shooting environments so far have been the
sea (meaning the shore, not the deeps), on rickety scaffolding
boards, deep mud, and in the middle of hard-core dance festival
crowds. At times those last two were together. And yes, the bottom of
my tripod legs *are* still just a bit muddy.
I've also shot from a paraglider, but no tripod or head was involved there. ;-)
I wonder what other extreme conditions people have been in when
shooting panos? Probably some would put my examples to shame!
Anyway, thanks to the head and a modicum of care, some of the pano
shots from festivals were exceptionally successful. One was used for
the cover of my recent CS3 Integration book.
My Absolute head is solid.
My tripod is also solid, although I do wish I had a lighter one.
If the surface my tripod is on isn't solid, then I need to watch for
this and also be ready to deal with this afterwards when stitching.
Basic common sense.
I try to avoid introducing instability as I walk around the tripod,
but there are times when this can't be avoided entirely, solid
head/tripod or not. And that's what control points in PTGui help to
- Ideally, you should NOT be trying to optimize your lens every single time
You should do your optimization one time, in an ideal environment. HDR is
unnecessary for this step.
1 set of images around with excellently placed control points, will optimize
your lens and your template.
Then you only need to apply this template to ANY other shooting situation if
you're using the almighty precision head.
You only need 3-4 cps per image set for stitching, with an already optimized
lens. And I have always assumed.. 0 cps with the precision head.
One should only need to attempt cp's across and hdr set with an uncalibrated
lens, a wobbly head, handheld shots, head without accurate detents, when
you're unsure about your template, etc.
When looking at your ptgui project, you'll find many cps that are not
Southern Digital Solutions LLC - Atlanta, Georgia
I understand what you and others have said about the over and under
exposed images not having enough control points, however shouldnt the
first image of a bracketed set, the metered image, be able to
generate sufficient control points?
Would it make any difference to give the user the option to only use
control points from the metered shot whaterv order it is in ? eg. 0,-
,+ or -,0,+ etc just to take the 0 and use that as a model? Then
perhaps give the user the option to over ride the master image in
case like you say the image is deleted.
Thank you for your information! 3am time for bed.
--- In PanoToolsNG@ <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com,
"Erik Krause" <erik.krause@...>
> On Saturday, December 01, 2007 at 3:27, verifone411 wrote:
> > Thus only the first image should get control points generated. The
> > images images do within the bracketed set do not need control
> Because in over- and underexposed areas there are no control points
> possible. I suspect one shoots HDR because there is a large dynamic
> range. If one side of the first image of a bracketed set is
> completely overexposed but the other isn't, PTGui needs to use the
> darker images instead to generate relevant CPs. But on the darker
> the other side might be underexposed, hence the control points fromother
> the first image are needed...
> You could argue that it would be sufficient to generate CPs in
> but the first image only if in the first one there weren't relevantare
> ones. But if the user decides to unlink images after that, there
> no control points in lots of images. I guess that is why Joost[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> decided to create CPs for all of them, even if they are linked...
> > from example 0 & 7 (why cant we start at 1?)
> For historical reasons: C programmers always start counting with 0.
> Best regards
> http://www.erik- <http://www.erik-krause.de> krause.de
- Matthew Rogers-2 wrote:
> Hi Carel,
> I normally try and stay out of these debates but making such a broad
> sweeping statement about the 360Precision head is simply not
> acceptable. One thing I've learnt whilst dealing with thousands of
> photographers over the past 3-4 years is experience means nothing.
> Just because someone has been involved in panoramic photography since
> it's inception doesn't mean they actually know what they're talking
> about. In-fact it quite often means there so stuck in their ways that
> they're not willing to accept change.
I made a simple observation that one should not try to figure out what is
going on with mis-aligned control points by doing a test on a carpet. You
can use the universe's best pano head and it will still not make a
difference as the errors caused by movement of the carpet & floor will be
much bigger. It is not that hard to shoot a pano in such circumstances, but
any reasonably decent panohead will do. I have had many situations where I
wished I had a 360Precision, but a carpeted floor would not have been one of
those. The reason that I have not bought a 360Precision yet is that I use
two cameras and 3 lenses and often decide on the spot which one I will use.
It is not that I am stuck in my ways, as you opine, it's that I so often use
different setups, while the 360Precision only allows one.
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-control-points-are-determined-in-bracketed-shots-using-PTGUI-tf4926132.html#a14119009
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Hi Carel,
Your email proves my point. We launched our fully adjustable
precision head over 12 months ago, so why not buy one of those ? I
just don't know why you have so much trouble shooting panos on
carpet ? I can understand shooting on 10mm pile carpet but we ain't
living in the 70s.
> Hi Matt,
> I made a simple observation that one should not try to figure out
> what is
> going on with mis-aligned control points by doing a test on a
> carpet. You
> can use the universe's best pano head and it will still not make a
> difference as the errors caused by movement of the carpet & floor
> will be
> much bigger. It is not that hard to shoot a pano in such
> circumstances, but
> any reasonably decent panohead will do. I have had many situations
> where I
> wished I had a 360Precision, but a carpeted floor would not have
> been one of
> those. The reason that I have not bought a 360Precision yet is that
> I use
> two cameras and 3 lenses and often decide on the spot which one I
> will use.
> It is not that I am stuck in my ways, as you opine, it's that I so
> often use
> different setups, while the 360Precision only allows one.
> Carel Struycken
- Matthew Rogers-2 wrote:
> Hi Carel,
> Your email proves my point. We launched our fully adjustable
> precision head over 12 months ago, so why not buy one of those ? I
> just don't know why you have so much trouble shooting panos on
> carpet ? I can understand shooting on 10mm pile carpet but we ain't
> living in the 70s.
Why do you keep mis-interpreting what I say? I have no trouble shooting
panos on a carpet. I regularly shoot from a 6m hand held pole that sways in
the wind (another scenario where a 360Precision would not be of much use).
There are situations where I wish for a template-able panohead like the
360Precision, but nowhere on your website have I found information that the
Precision Adjuste is template-able.
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-control-points-are-determined-in-bracketed-shots-using-PTGUI-tf4933166.html#a14120732
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Prickles all 'round, eh?
Personally, I find Carel's various posts to be very interesting (the
Mt. Wilson Observatory object movie was wonderful!), and I find
Matt's products to be superb. And you both give great advice. For me,
the disagreements and the rest aren't important. I just put it down
to the kind of free-thinking individualist that gets into panorama
Carel, I'm about to test an Adjuste, as soon as I finish marking some
MA dissertations. I haven't tried it yet, but I have examined it
carefully. Yes, it should be every bit as template-able as the
Absolute. You'd just need to note down or mark the right positions
for your different combinations of camera/lens equipment.
Here's a pre-test assessment if you want one: It is a serious
investment to make, but I reckon it'd let you have your cake and eat
But don't go using it on trampolines, ok? (sorry, silly joke ;-)
Author, Creative Suite 3 Integration (Focal Press)
Senior Lecturer in Publishing, LCC (University of the Arts, London)
Technical Editor, MacUser magazine
design, programming, VR photography, consultancy
iChat/AIM & Skype ThatKeith
- For those having issues with panos on carpet and flexing wooden floors..
Is it a matter of not finding any auto stich points?
Are you use ing PTGUi? if so does it rate it ias very good, good, bad
very bad etc...
- On Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 12:47, Sacha Griffin wrote:
> When looking at your ptgui project, you'll find many cps that are notYes, of course. That are those between images inside a linked set -
as long as this set stays linked. They get used as soon as you unlink
the images and optimize again. This might be necessary sometimes if
you discover that there are HDR merging errors between those
- I think the reference to carpets and flexing wooden floors, is regarding
using a fixed PTGui template and pin registered panohead giving the
(possible) ability to not need optimising.
ie. Load images into a pre-prepared ptgui template and just stitch. So, no
cp's and no optimising.
(you 'do' have to follow a fairly rigourous set of repeatable rules for this
to work well)
In general carpet and wooden floors etc. are not a problem when you are
going to insert cp's and optimise.
(unless there is something 'very' close to the camera :-)
)For those having issues with panos on carpet and flexing
)Is it a matter of not finding any auto stich points?
)Are you use ing PTGUi? if so does it rate it ias very good,
)good, bad very bad etc...