So after running into a friend and colleague, it was suggested that I stabilize the footage and re-track it. I've now done that and added more terrain. The stabilize is good, but far from perfect. I'll have to revisit that.
The reason I don't like stabilizing footage and camera tracking is purely a technical one. Artistically, it can look much better because any shaky hands can be smoothed out. The down side is twofold:
One, it can look pan-and-scan-esque if the stabilization is very large where you're reintroducing a move into something that's static or conversely, stabilizing something that's moving.
Two, by sliding the footage around, you're essentially "lying" to your camera tracking software. When you film something, your footage has a center of interest which is the center of your footage. If you stabilize that and shift the footage around, you're forcing your camera tracking software to move the camera all over the place, either rotationally or positionally, all in the name of "stable" 2d footage.
Thirdly (I know, I said two reasons), when you stabilize, if your footage has motion blur and you’re telling that footage, "no, actually I want you to be still," you'll have a perfectly smooth piece of footage that suddenly has weird blur going in different directions. A good example of this is that VFX shot in Gladiator where the tiger is leaping at Russel Crowe. I'm positive that the motion of the tiger was shot strangely and the motion blur that it had was unremovable and therefore it looks very strange when compared with the motion blur that he has.
If any of you readers have any comments on how it's progressing, I'd be interested to hear them. I'm not 100% sold on the composition of the land, but I do hope to finish that aspect in the next week so that I can start playing around in Mudbox and detailing them up.