user39965: 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:

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:

Any ideas how to move forward? Any help appriciated!

user4426: 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.

39965: <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.stack.imgur.com/SDE10.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/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.stack.imgur.com/GqBvg.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/GqBvg.jpg" alt="angle cut &amp; stitched" /></a></p>
<p>Any ideas how to move forward? Any help appriciated!</p>
 4426: <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>
