March 24, 2010 at 01:37Test stitch speed panoramas MS ICE vs Autopano Giga 2.0.3 and Hugin 0.7.0
A small test comparing the speed of panorama stitching in the newly released new version (I wrote about it here ) Microsoft Image Composite Editor 1.3.3 ( download ). Compare with two popular stitching - Hugin and Autopano Giga . Tests - panorama of 50 MPix (10 frames) and panorama of 81 MPix (18 frames).
Iron: CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16 GHz, RAM 4 Gb, OS Windows XP Professional x86 SP3, ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 Mb.
Example 1
10 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 12200 x 4300 (50 MPix).
From this test, it turned out that with the default settings Autopano Giga does not work in the most efficient way. In the next test I use corrections in the parameters that led to the best result in the first test.
Example 2
18 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 13500 x 6300 (81 MPix).
Conclusion
ICE provides significant gains in cross-linking speed compared to Autopano Giga and Hugin. Acceleration relative to Hugin is 4.6x (10 frames) and 4.1x (18 frames), relative to Autopano Giga grows with increasing complexity of the panorama - 5.1x (10 frames) and 8.9x (18 frames).
PS
I wanted to check out the new ICE mode for stitching gigapixel structured panoramas, but unfortunately this mode drops steadily at least in Windows XP. The problem was reproduced by the developers (see the ICE forum ) and I hope that a fixed version will be released soon.
Iron: CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16 GHz, RAM 4 Gb, OS Windows XP Professional x86 SP3, ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 Mb.
Example 1
10 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 12200 x 4300 (50 MPix).
| Program | preview | render | Total | differences from default settings |
| Autopano Giga 2.0.3 | 0:08 | 3:30 | 3:38 | cache 512 mb memory use: high |
| Autopano Giga 2.0.3 | 0:08 | 3:58 | 4.06 | memory use: high |
| Autopano Giga 2.0.3 | 0:08 | 4:05 | 4:13 | |
| Hugin 0.7.0 | 1:33 | 1:43 | 3:16 | |
| ICE 1.3.3 | 0:13 | 0:29 | 0:42 |
From this test, it turned out that with the default settings Autopano Giga does not work in the most efficient way. In the next test I use corrections in the parameters that led to the best result in the first test.
Example 2
18 frames 2592 x 3888, panorama 13500 x 6300 (81 MPix).
| Program | preview | render | Total | differences from default settings |
| Autopano Giga 2.0.3 | 0:14 | 11:21 | 11:35 | cache 512 mb memory use: high |
| Hugin 0.7.0 | 2:43 | 2:41 | 5:24 | |
| ICE 1.3.3 | 0:21 | 0:57 | 1:18 |
Conclusion
ICE provides significant gains in cross-linking speed compared to Autopano Giga and Hugin. Acceleration relative to Hugin is 4.6x (10 frames) and 4.1x (18 frames), relative to Autopano Giga grows with increasing complexity of the panorama - 5.1x (10 frames) and 8.9x (18 frames).
PS
I wanted to check out the new ICE mode for stitching gigapixel structured panoramas, but unfortunately this mode drops steadily at least in Windows XP. The problem was reproduced by the developers (see the ICE forum ) and I hope that a fixed version will be released soon.