Hans Nyberg wrote:
> The only reason people have used version 3.0 is that Kevin has posted it for download at
> Ippei did not even know that according to himself.
How should he, since Kevin didn't tell him?
> To get feedback from Mac users you have to publish a pressrelease at the QTVR-list, the
> RealViz forum, at IVRPA , at PTMac , at PTAssembler , at PanotoolsNG and a couple of
> more places where the users are.
Actually, this needs to be done once a end-user useable version of enblend
3.1 is available. Otherwise ordinary users will be confused and helpless.
This does neither help them, nor the developers. I was hesitant to move this
stage of development to panotoolsng after the confusion of the first,
not so well documented, and mixed up version of enblend/enfuse posted here a
But Erik convinced me that it was a good idea, and people seem to be happy
about the progress enblend and enfuse are seeing.
> And of course at the right channel for Enblend which is at http://enblend.sourceforge.net/
You are right, this needs updating.
Unfortunately, there is no enblend-devel mailing list, so it gets most
attention (developer wise) on the hugin-ptx list (which is not only about
hugin but also about other open source software related to panoramas).
P.S. I'd LOVE to see better blending at zenith and nadir too.
Unfortunately, programs don't get written by wishful thinking.
Not sure if I should quit the job that feeds my family, so that I have time
to add that feature... Better suggestion welcome!
I guess the best you can do is ask people which support enblend as part of a
commercial package to add the features you need.
Believe it or not, enblend is mainly developed by Andrew in his spare time,
which seems to become less and less, this is why I have started to push
enblend/enfuse towards a release (In my spare time, too).