<p>There's a pretty good explanation of how to do this fro polyhaven (who make lots of HDRI images which require stitching of multiple shots):
<a href="https://blog.polyhaven.com/how-to-create-high-quality-hdri/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://blog.polyhaven.com/how-to-create-high-quality-hdri/</a></p>
<p>They recommend using PTGui to stitch the images together
<a href="https://ptgui.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://ptgui.com/</a></p>
<p>To do this for a video you'd have to convert to an image sequence, then script something to sequentially stitch all your files.  it would take a while.</p>
<p>I'd try mesh warping them in After Effects and carefully masking between them.  You might just about get away with it.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-08T17:48:54.650Z
2022-12-08T17:48:54.650Z
tomh
<p>So, at this point, I'm not sure if this is a programming or a physics problem! I'm attempting to concatinate 2 video inputs together to cover a wider field of view. As far as I can tell, this is usually done by &quot;stitching&quot; using matching keypoints in the two images. This can be computationally expensive, and as I'm trying to show the output in real time, my approach has been a simple mechanical allignment and a pixel overlap, blending/merging the overlap together.</p>
<p>Here's the problem. Usually stitching is done with 2 cameras placed next to each other. My cameras are places 3 meters apart. Two different point of views resulting in two different perspectives.</p>
<p>Now, the stitching doesn't have to be absolutely perfect. My goal is to concatinate the inputs while NOT losing objects. Obviously, depending on the field of view of the cameras, there will be a &quot;dead space&quot; close to the cameras.</p>
<p>Here's my starting point:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/SDE10.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/SDE10.jpg" alt="Starting point" /></a></p>
<p>One idea was to do a cut with an angle and then stitch the images together. That way, I keep information close by while avoiding double objects further out. But this introduces an unwanted distortion and I still get double objects further out:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/GqBvg.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/GqBvg.jpg" alt="angle cut &amp; stitched" /></a></p>
<p>Any ideas how to move forward? Any help appriciated!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-08T11:30:20.037Z
You cannot just cut at an angle - every point will have a transformation required in order to make it fit. See the old autostitch programme for guidance and info - it's a fair bit more complex than you think, unfortunately
Dr Mayhem
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-09T08:33:51.250Z
Autostitch (by Matthew Brown?) looks pretty impressive! I'll have a look into that. At first glance it does however look like the approach is similar to most other sources I've found: cameras are placed close to each other. But yes, I'm afraid this whole project is more complicated than I thought at first. Regardless, thanks for your reply.
user39965
<video><camera>
2 camera stitching with 3m distance
user39965
# 2 camera stitching with 3m distance

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-12-07)

So, at this point, I'm not sure if this is a programming or a physics problem! I'm attempting to concatinate 2 video inputs together to cover a wider field of view. As far as I can tell, this is usually done by "stitching" using matching keypoints in the two images. This can be computationally expensive, and as I'm trying to show the output in real time, my approach has been a simple mechanical allignment and a pixel overlap, blending/merging the overlap together.

Here's the problem. Usually stitching is done with 2 cameras placed next to each other. My cameras are places 3 meters apart. Two different point of views resulting in two different perspectives.

Now, the stitching doesn't have to be absolutely perfect. My goal is to concatinate the inputs while NOT losing objects. Obviously, depending on the field of view of the cameras, there will be a "dead space" close to the cameras.

Here's my starting point:

[![Starting point](https://i.sstatic.net/SDE10.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/SDE10.jpg)

One idea was to do a cut with an angle and then stitch the images together. That way, I keep information close by while avoiding double objects further out. But this introduces an unwanted distortion and I still get double objects further out:

[![angle cut & stitched](https://i.sstatic.net/GqBvg.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/GqBvg.jpg)

Any ideas how to move forward? Any help appriciated!

**Tags:** video, camera

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You cannot just cut at an angle - every point will have a transformation required in order to make it fit. See the old autostitch programme for guidance and info - it's a fair bit more complex than you think, unfortunately  
> **username_0**: Autostitch (by Matthew Brown?) looks pretty impressive! I'll have a look into that. At first glance it does however look like the approach is similar to most other sources I've found: cameras are placed close to each other. But yes, I'm afraid this whole project is more complicated than I thought at first. Regardless, thanks for your reply.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-12-08. Score: 2

There's a pretty good explanation of how to do this fro polyhaven (who make lots of HDRI images which require stitching of multiple shots):
<https://blog.polyhaven.com/how-to-create-high-quality-hdri/>

They recommend using PTGui to stitch the images together
<https://ptgui.com/>

To do this for a video you'd have to convert to an image sequence, then script something to sequentially stitch all your files. it would take a while.

I'd try mesh warping them in After Effects and carefully masking between them. You might just about get away with it.


---

