No offense, but that looks suspiciously like a photomerge result from CS2 -- Are you saying that stitch was from CS3? If so, which rendering intent did you use? If you use "perspective correct" in CS3 you will get straighter lines, not as significantly bowed as you got in your photomerge example above.
I am not saying it will outperform PTAssembler, but it should do a far better job than your example shows.
You can see my post on stitching in the digital section -- I posted larger single jpeg frames if you want to run them in PTAssembler to compare:http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=14827
Yes, it's CS3 beta, but Interactive
didn't do anything! And Reposition Only
doesn't work either! I would love it if Photomerge
would work perfectly (or good enough!) The blender is excellent!
If you'd like, I'll do the pics you posted, rectilnear with PTAssembler, but it'll be the same, except that all of the verticals will be vertical.
Most of what I do isn't rectilinear output, so perfect output perspective isn't a big deal. To me there are two things that do matter: I just stitched 3x9 16bpcc images. PTA and smartblend
took 25 min, to Smart Sharpen
the result took 30 min, and to do Photomerge, I quit after 120 min! And Photomerge
doesn't do mercator output, that I can tell, and that is a really big deal
, for tall, vertcal landscape mosaics! And being able to exactly define a horizontal, exactly straight line, the horizon of a lake or an ocean is also a really big deal. Bumpy horizons look dumb.
I may have overstated the issue of having imput images with different FOVs, Photomerge
may recoginize that perfectly, but I don't see any way to tell if that's so, you can only wait for the output and look for problems...
I'd like to know if you can get better results with Photomerge
, I'd llike to know what gives the best output, that's the only important thing!
PS: Can I post you a few pics, to see whta results you can get?