Comment 32 for bug 685105

        Oops! Sorry, I was off-by-one in the
exponent. 8-/ The largest _signed_ integer
(`int') typically is 2**31 - 1, not 2**32 - 1.
The latter is correct for _unsigned_ integers
(`unsigned int'). However, your calculation
still holds even with the half-as-large limit.

> Another thing that would be great for that
> purpose was if I could combine pictures of
> different zoom levels into a panorama with
> hugin.

        Enblend will always produce an image
(often called "panorama") at exactly one
resolution. Currently, no provisions are
available to generate data for multi-resolution
panorama viewers. A common way to circumvent
this limitation is to generate a panorama at the
highest possible resolution and feed it into a
3D, VR, or whatever multi-resolution format
generator, which -- again typically -- has
compatible viewer applications as side-kicks or
vice versa.

        With respect to the problem of combining
images at different resolutions into one
panorama. This is possible in the way that you
could upscale all of your "wide-angle" shots
until their resolution matches the one of your
most extreme telephoto image. Now you cut holes
with some overlap (for control-points, alignment
and for Enblend to blend the seam away) into the
wide-angle shots where the telephoto ones sit.
Otherwise Enblend complains that your telephoto
images do not add new content. Finally, you
blend all images together, where you pay
particular attention to the images' order.
"Wide-angle" shots -- the frames -- go first,
telephoto ones -- the pot-hole fillers -- go
last.

I have never created a panorama this way, but we
have a standard test case for Enblend comprising
of a pair of images, where the first image has a
hole and the second one fills it with generous
overlap. This test works perfectly well.
Maybe, Bruno Postle wants to chime in here, as
he often experiments with the boundaries of
Enblend.

> With hugin 2012 the assistant finds a lot of
> wrong control points between pictures that
> don't overlap. ...

        This question ought to go to the Hugin
newsgroup. It is misplaced here.