@NoBrian which image set are you using?
Hi - great article by the way - I was looking for this information a while ago and it was quite hard to find and this added some more I did not know.
I was using my own set of 3 images. The camera was hand held and set to bracket the exposures, so they were already fairly well aligned but a couple of pixels out.
Iâm glad we got you most of the way there 
What version of hugin are you using? This tutorial was done using the latest 2016.02 release; Iâm not sure if that has anything to do with it.
I just updated the Debian package (2016.2.0) and still get the error message from enblend:
enblend: excessive image overlap detected; too high risk of defective seam line
enblend: note: remove at least one of the images
enblend: info: remove invalid output image âP9170846-P9170848_exposure_0000.tifâ
I assume enblend is trying to stitch into a larger image, rather than rejecting anything outside the common intersection. Enfuse works perfectly. If I do a wide panorama with e.g. 6 images in 2 stacks each of 3 bracketed exposures, then enblend does the job without complaining.
Random Debian tip: use enfuse-mp and enblend-mp, these are binaries built with multicore support. You can set the exexutiable name in huginâs preferences.
1 Like
Unfortunately I am still on i386 architecture. I know, I should do something about it. But no mp versions in these packages.
Added: I tried out one of your image sets - even processing the ORF files to TIF as I did with my own set and it is perfectly fine with your settings. So it is a bit of a mystery. My images were +/- 2 stops but otherwise I canât see any reason for the different outcome.
Added2: When I load my +/-2 images as camera JPEGs hugin tells me it has failed to autodetect any stacks. When I load as TIFF files this check somehow gets by-passed so it appears enblend will try to stitch a standard panorama if it gets the chance. I suspect this is why I have to use different switches.
Added3. Now I see I also had the wrong âFeature Matchingâ setting, but although this produces a better set of control points (something else I just learned!) it does not fix the enblend problem above. Also one trivial nitpick - the focal multiplier on the examples is 2 as they are from an M4/3 camera. If you optimize over pitch and yaw (as someone suggested) I think this could have a minor effect for big shifts.
If you want to post your images, Iâd be happy to play with them, though I am certainly no master. I have been playing a lot with hugin lately and the little changes in settings do make a huge difference.
The +/-2 I donât think should make a hugs difference, but hard to say without seeing the images. You can always assign control points manually, but I donât think that should be at all necessary for stacking images.
@paperdigits - I did a bit more testing and found my OOC JPEGs (smaller size) blend fine with your settings, despite the +/-2 stop brackets, while the (80Mbyte) 16-bit processed TIFFs show the problem.
Is there any reason to use the âexposure fused from any arrangementâ setting in this context, rather than âExposure fused from stacksâ? According to the hugin documentation the former first attempts to do a panorama stitch on images of similar exposure. This seems to require some automatic sorting of the images into exposure stacks. This mostly seems redundant in this case and perhaps less robust.
1 Like
If.you have settings that are producing output youâre satisfied with, by all means use those. I tried with the sample.images here and didnât see a difference between the two outputs.
My Debian install doesnât have those.
Maybe its only in debian stable?
@houz - Only some Debian architectures have the mp versions. In particular not in the i386 packages. Still showing >100% CPU utilisation running Enfuse inside Hugin. Although Nona stitcher seems to be the heaviest user.
Debian Jessie has an enfuse-mp in the enfuse package, while Stretch only has an enfuse that was built with OpenMP enabled, so itâs basically enfuse-mp (now by default).
HTH
Flössie
Ah, that would explain it as I always run Sid. I am too dense to remember the other names.
@bazza I just tried it an it works for me.
I just got the 404 also. Iâll look into it shortly. Thank you!
Fixed it last night - should be good now!
Select the Optimizer tab.
Nice walk-through but I havenât got an âOptimizerâ tab. In the âViewâ menu, I see one but it is disabled (same for âExposureâ). Am I missing something? If I skip this step, the final images donât see to be âcorrectedâ. Using Hugin 2019.0.0.a369cbe55179.
Are you using the âExpertâ view?