Agisoft Metashape
Agisoft Metashape => General => Topic started by: Andrew on March 26, 2014, 12:27:14 AM
-
Hopefully you guys find it interesting what we're cooking up here using Photoscan. Some interactive scan samples included in the article.
http://www.theastronauts.com/2014/03/visual-revolution-vanishing-ethan-carter/ (http://www.theastronauts.com/2014/03/visual-revolution-vanishing-ethan-carter/)
Cheers,
Andrew
-
Great stuff Andrew! Really looking forward to seeing more from this project. :D
-
Thanks!
Unreal4 holds a lot of promise, but without a sizeable team of programmers I wouldn't recommend taking the leap just yet (unless it just for visualizations with light scripting). We are experimenting with it a lot so that we can hit the ground running a couple of months from now, when it matures enough for us to port the game to UE4 (and target more platforms). Hopefully we will get to improve some scans in the process as well, a couple of them from the preview are almost two years old, I (and Photoscan) have come a long way since :)
Andrew
-
Thanks for the reply Andrew! In my original posted I asked if you guys were looking into UE4, but then saw on your site that you've been in development for several months now in UE3. I work in games for training and our current project is UE3 based, but we did pick up a few shiny new licenses of UE4 to mess with.
Once again, great job. It's exciting to see photogrammetry being used more and more in the gaming industry...and one thing is consistent...Photoscan is the tool of choice. :D
-
Incredible work Andrew. *clap* :)
-
Awesome Andrew! What approach do you use to capture the larger cliffs and so on?
-
Approach to scanning bigger things? In short - lots and lots of photos with enough overlap and with hope for lighting conditions not to change throughout :)
It sometimes helps to not only shoot entire thing from consistent distance that will give you target fidelity but also take some snaps from slightly larger distance - helps with aligning photos in problematic areas, but it can at times decrease accuracy of alignment - quite tricky.
-Andrew
-
ok cool:) do you have any way, trick, of knowing you got enough overlaps in picture? I find it very hard when covering larger areas that it is very easy to miss out in overlap. Are you using a qudracopter or similar?
-
So far we survive without drones but they are on the shopping list :) You can achieve quite a lot with tall monopod and wireless trigger.
As for overlap:
- I tend to shoot for too much overlap rather than too little,
- I try to be really aware of what each photo captures, memorize features and make sure they end up in next frame
- I am really methodical about moving along captured geometry. I try to shoot in rows, I tend not to get distracted with cavities (and such) that require additional photos, I get back to those later.
- I try not to shoot multiple camera angles from same position, it's better to just move your (camera's) position
Hope that helps!
-
thanks andrew, every tip I can get is helpful! Tried capture 10m of ground cover today and got lost after three photos haha.
Andrew or anyone else, do you know of any monopod/tripod that will get the camera further up than just 2m from ground?
-
a monopod lifted over your head is taller than 2m ;-)
and the camera can be triggered with a wired or wireless remote
some wifi controllable cameras will even show you a live view to a smartphone remote app, very handy!
there are even taller pole mounts that are available, but they can get a bit wobbly or unstable, so usually not good if you are dealing with slow exposures. some people will hack something tall out of a 'painter's pole', too...if you are looking for a cheaper option. some of the photo oriented ones can get pricey.
-
That's exactly what I meant, lifting your monopod over your head and triggering via wireless trigger in your hand. Depending on your height and how tall your monopod is, you can take photos from 3.5m, give or take. Of course you need to compensate for camera shake (you're NOT gonna be able to keep it steady), and framing what you don't see can be tricky.
-
Great stuff guys. Glad to see more gamedevs using amazing Photoscan for their games. Makes sharing tips and approaches easier.
Admir
-
Awesome stuff!
How did you do the tops of the buildings like the rooftiles on the church? Is this all shot from ground level?
-
Luckily the rooftops were sloped and could be photographed even from ground level, but I did shoot them from some distance, and with camera raised high on monopod (height of approximately 3,7m).
Drone would certainly help though :)
-
Big props for mentioning Agisoft in your blog!! Not enough companies do this.
For your face rig, if you haven't already try switching over to USB3. It's far more reliable, you can overcome distance issues associated with USB2 cables, you can send more data and hook up more cameras per PC.
-
Just over the last year it feels like Agisoft is starting to become very well used almost a standard in all larger game studios, For ground cover, characters, props and so on
-
For your face rig, if you haven't already try switching over to USB3. It's far more reliable, you can overcome distance issues associated with USB2 cables, you can send more data and hook up more cameras per PC.
Thanks for the tip, Lee! I actually do hook things up to USB3.0 on my Lenovo notebook, but since cameras themselves (600D's) are 2.0, I didn't bother to search for 3.0 cables and hubs. It didn't occur to me that it would make a difference, unless cameras were USB 3.0 as well...
-Andrew
-
For your face rig, if you haven't already try switching over to USB3. It's far more reliable, you can overcome distance issues associated with USB2 cables, you can send more data and hook up more cameras per PC.
Thanks for the tip, Lee! I actually do hook things up to USB3.0 on my Lenovo notebook, but since cameras themselves (600D's) are 2.0, I didn't bother to search for 3.0 cables and hubs. It didn't occur to me that it would make a difference, unless cameras were USB 3.0 as well...
-Andrew
Try it and see, sometimes depends on the motherboard used. Desktops are far better than relying on Laptops.
-
Hi,
I made some experiments. I used Desktop and Laptop computers. As long as your camera is USB 2.0 , it doesn't matter if you use USB 3.0
Although, I can say there is a difference with USB Hubs. I would recommend a reliable USB hub, it will do.
Cheers
-
Hi,
I made some experiments. I used Desktop and Laptop computers. As long as your camera is USB 2.0 , it doesn't matter if you use USB 3.0
Although, I can say there is a difference with USB Hubs. I would recommend a reliable USB hub, it will do.
Cheers
It matters a great deal. Mainly because you can overcome the 3m limit set to USB2. You can extend to 10m, 15m and daisy chain more.
USB3 hubs are also far more stable and reliable on a multi-camera rig, and you can achieve over 70 cameras per PC.
-
That's very interesting indeed, Lee! None of us expected any improvement unless the source (cameras) were USB 3.0 as well.
From what I gather, you are using 3.0 hubs, 3.0 cables between hubs and PC, and obviously 3.0 in your PC. But, did you keep the 2.0 miniUSB->USB from cameras to hubs? Do these even exist in 3.0 flavor? I did a search in some local stores around here and couldn't find any.
-Andrew
-
That's very interesting indeed, Lee! None of us expected any improvement unless the source (cameras) were USB 3.0 as well.
From what I gather, you are using 3.0 hubs, 3.0 cables between hubs and PC, and obviously 3.0 in your PC. But, did you keep the 2.0 miniUSB->USB from cameras to hubs? Do these even exist in 3.0 flavor? I did a search in some local stores around here and couldn't find any.
-Andrew
You go USB2 (no longer than 3m) to USB3 (over 15m fine) then to the PC. Experiment a little and you will see the gains. Sometimes the type of USB2 and USB3 cables play a big role in the reliability aspect, as well as the type of USB hubs you get (I recommend 7 port Anker) Some USB2 cables wont work at all, while others will work perfectly.
-
Lee, I am not playing the devil's advocate , but sorry I am currently using each 3 meters + 5 meters cable distance with USB 2.0 Hubs for 60+ Cameras. Although, in your point of view, I will give go for some USB 3.0 Hubs and see the result.
Cheers
-
Lee, I am not playing the devil's advocate , but sorry I am currently using each 3 meters + 5 meters cable distance with USB 2.0 Hubs for 60+ Cameras. Although, in your point of view, I will give go for some USB 3.0 Hubs and see the result.
Cheers
I would start my reply with your name, but it's not listed.
but sorry I am currently using each 3 meters + 5 meters
Cheers
No need to apologize.
Exhale, I wouldn't be surprised at 5m. After USB2, the extra power should boost the signal. The point is the set 3m distance from camera to what ever source it's plugged into, Hub or PC. That's the limit with USB2.
From my 5 years worth of experience in this field, USB2 is a nightmare and terribly unreliable. So yes, I would recommend USB3 for many reasons. If you want to cover larger distances and require 99.99% reliability, USB3. Try it.
Plus the Anker USB3 hubs have nice little blue lights on them that only light up when a camera is working. Very handy.
-
Andrew, great work! What viewer are you using to display the models on your website?
-
The one we used is http://p3d.in/ but there are other similar services, https://sketchfab.com/ and http://verold.com/ to name a few.
-Andrew
-
Just wanted to say these Agisoft forums are a goldmine in regards to learning the ropes, it is really exciting to see such candid discussion among developers. It's refreshing. So is photogrammetry widely used in the gaming community, because from my opinion, if so, it's a really well kept secret.
BTW having a blast with UE4, I think the indie game scene is going to explode now with these new licencing models. Mix that with photogrammetry and you are going to see more and more titles appear with qualities only once obtainable from AAA developers. Exciting times indeed. ;D