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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] help with the right software for my mac?

Expand Messages
  • crane@ukonline.co.uk
    ... or rather tar -xvf hugin-0.6.1_mac-tools.tar and the .bz file I guess is bunzip instead of gunzip, what the advantages are I do not know. mick ... This
    Message 1 of 14 , Jul 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      > tar xvf hugin-0.6.1_mac-tools.tar
      > gives
      > hugin-0.6.1_mac-tools
      or rather
      tar -xvf hugin-0.6.1_mac-tools.tar

      and the .bz file I guess is
      bunzip instead of gunzip, what the advantages are I do not know.

      mick


      ----------------------------------------------
      This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
    • Harry van der Wolf
      Hi Chris, You should download the
      Message 2 of 14 , Jul 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Chris,

        You should download the
        HuginOSX-v061_build2.dmg<http://sourceforge.net/project/downloading.php?group_id=77506&filename=HuginOSX-v061_build2.dmg&a=42849664>.
        The other ones are not suitable for your.
        The tarball is a source version which you have to compile yourself.
        The universal one can be run on both ppc and i386 and is bigger than a
        native ppc version, but it will take installed about 50 MB. What's the
        issue?
        10 8Mp+ source images and it's resulting pano take more space. And that's
        when talking about jpegs. With 10 8p+ tiff images you have easily 150-250
        MB.

        Harry


        2009/7/1 Chris Burck <chris.burck@...>

        >
        >
        > ok, bruno kindly provided the url for the complete list of hugin
        > downloads, which could not seem to navigate to. now i need to ask
        > which of the options do i want? there is a link for
        > hugin-0.6.1_mac-tools.tar.gz, another for hugin-0.6.1.tar.bz, and
        > another for HuginOSX-v061_build2.dmg a universal binary. this last
        > one seems like it would use more drive space than a native ppc
        > version. so if i can use the first one, apparently a tarball version
        > (haven't figured what that means yet), then i guess that would my
        > preference. can anyone offer any guidance? thanks again.
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Chris Burck
        thanks, harry. i ll download the binary for now. i am on a fixed storage income, so to speak, for the next several months at least so i have to try and
        Message 3 of 14 , Jul 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          thanks, harry. i'll download the binary for now. i am on a fixed
          storage income, so to speak, for the next several months at least so i
          have to try and optimize wherever possible. i don't work with large
          image files. 99% of what i do is film, scanning black and white negs
          at 1200ppi or 2400ppi so the files are usually 10MB or less, and only
          the very best of them are stored as tiffs. the rest are either
          deleted or saved as jpegs (if i want to share them, i'd be doing so in
          jpeg format anyway). thanks again. i appreciate all the help
          everyone has kindly given. i'll let you all know how i get on.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.