Even from "pictures" taken with an STM which are definitely "not optical" the detection of the edges as well as differences in measuring (by design) can be done as if the pictures where shot with a camera. My younger brother now uses autopano for scientific research and documentation: He stitches STM pictures of single atomic surface structures 1-0-0. If you sources are from a managed setup, it i s possible to use AP Pro for stacking. No steps or adjustments are lost, so if the resulting pano does have some inconsistencies, just one the set with the AP metadata and you can start from the point of your editing directly. recipes, etc can be stored in metadata-files for further pano-editing later on. ![]() So for further editing, it is possible to directly do this job in PS with PS-Files.Īll pano steps. Processed pictures are rendered faster, but the results are less precise as if raw files were used. The differences between using processed or raw files is primarily an issue of time. HDR mechanisms can be triggered by using various algorithms like Anti Ghost, the amount of pixel usage, the way, pixels are used for adjusting colour/brightness/hue at the edges of the used pictures.īesides standard out put formats, it is possible, to export up to 32bit TIFF, PSD, 16bit JPG and some more.Īs a starter, you do not even have to take care of differences ins colours or exposures in the first run. Spherical panos are only possible as well as a lot of other projection methods (Mercator, Pole etc.) I used it wit Nikon, Cannon, Leica, Sony, Panasonic RAWs and all are processed in a charme.Īnd that not one with a cylindrical projection. Autopano directly produces panos out of raw files directly. You do not even have to convert/edit raw files. Regrading learning curve and GUI it would be unfair to compare Autopano with Hugin/PTGui: Autopano overblows all others! ![]() From a functional capabilities view, auto pano is at least quite similar than Hugin/PTGui.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |