hugin-devs team mailing list archive

[Sergei Steshenko <1856345@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Public bug reported:

The more detailed summary: running geometric optimizer after stitcher,
but on the same input data produces drastically different result.

The testcase uses the same input data as in bug #1856336. The system is
the same and the instructions to download input data are the same. Input
data and evidence can be found under
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/NN3V/2x8jVAS9n .

As in bug #1856336 the 8 input .NEF files were imported the usual way
through the "Photos" window - see 'photos_window.png' file in the above
web folder.

Then control points were detected automatically - see the
'photos_window.png' file for details.

Then geometric optimizer was run - see the 'photos_window.png' file for
details. The optimizer produced a report - see
'first_optimizer_report.png' file in the above web folder. In the report
one can see, for example, "maximum: 7.041825".

Then photometric optimizer was then run.

Then "Stitcher" tab was clicked and stitcher parameters were set - see
'stitcher_window.png' file in the above web folder for details. In the
stitcher window "Calculate Field of View" and "Calculate Optimal Size"
were clicked.

When stitcher finished its run again "Photos" tab was clicked and in it
geometric optimizer was run again (by clicking its "Calculate" button).
The second run produced a different from the first run result - see
'second_optimizer_report.png' file in the above web folder for details.
In the report one can see among other things "maximum: 84.440525". I.e.
the second report maximum is more than order of magnitude bigger than
the first one. IMO consecutive run of a program on the same input data
should produce the same output data - unless there is randomization.

** Affects: hugin
     Importance: Undecided
         Status: New

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Hugin
Developers, which is subscribed to Hugin.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856345

Title:
  Running geometric optimizer after stitcher producing drastically
  different result

Status in Hugin:
  New

Bug description:
  The more detailed summary: running geometric optimizer after stitcher,
  but on the same input data produces drastically different result.

  The testcase uses the same input data as in bug #1856336. The system
  is the same and the instructions to download input data are the same.
  Input data and evidence can be found under
  https://cloud.mail.ru/public/NN3V/2x8jVAS9n .

  As in bug #1856336 the 8 input .NEF files were imported the usual way
  through the "Photos" window - see 'photos_window.png' file in the
  above web folder.

  Then control points were detected automatically - see the
  'photos_window.png' file for details.

  Then geometric optimizer was run - see the 'photos_window.png' file
  for details. The optimizer produced a report - see
  'first_optimizer_report.png' file in the above web folder. In the
  report one can see, for example, "maximum: 7.041825".

  Then photometric optimizer was then run.

  Then "Stitcher" tab was clicked and stitcher parameters were set - see
  'stitcher_window.png' file in the above web folder for details. In the
  stitcher window "Calculate Field of View" and "Calculate Optimal Size"
  were clicked.

  When stitcher finished its run again "Photos" tab was clicked and in
  it geometric optimizer was run again (by clicking its "Calculate"
  button). The second run produced a different from the first run result
  - see 'second_optimizer_report.png' file in the above web folder for
  details. In the report one can see among other things "maximum:
  84.440525". I.e. the second report maximum is more than order of
  magnitude bigger than the first one. IMO consecutive run of a program
  on the same input data should produce the same output data - unless
  there is randomization.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/hugin/+bug/1856345/+subscriptions