Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - gorenje

Pages: [1]
Hi Alexey,

So this is an issue with the 1.8.x version?

I'll use the decimate mesh in addition to build mesh, I hope this is fixed soon.


Hi Alexey,

I've attached two complete logs (align cameras, build dense cloud and build model) for the versions 1.7.4 and 1.8.1 (both standard).

The 1.7.4 worked and I got a model with custom face count, the 1.8.1 did not.


Hello gorenje,

Can you please provide the screenshot of the Build Mesh dialog with the parameters that you are typically using?

Hi Alexey,

Sorry but there does seem to be some kind of issue with the custom face value setting - I've now had the same issues with the standard version 1.8.1 (activated)

Basically this is my workflow:

1)  import photos into a chunk "original", align the photos and create a dense cloud (high quality)
2) duplicate that chunk into the "smaller" chunk - copying the depth maps and densecloud
3) create a model into this second chunk with a custom face count

I generally do this for 3 face count values using the batch process.

Anyway, it simply ignores the custom face count, always generating "high" quality face count.

I've been using this workflow for ages with 1.7.2 without any issues. Ironically this issue concident with me installing a pro version (test version) - can this cause issues with previously installed versions? Also this is on Linux (debian).


Feature Requests / Standard Plus (i.e. Medium) version please!
« on: February 03, 2022, 04:15:21 PM »
Hi There!

TL;DR: Please provide a version between standard and professional with some additional features!

I've been playing around with the professional version and have been amazed about the extra features that make life so much simpler. Basically for my use case, the two main features are markers and filtering dense clouds. Both aren't available in the standard version.

There seems to be quite a few people who would like these extra features and people are also willing to pay for them:

- Medium version for 500Euro: (Posted: Sept 2015)
- Filter dense cloud: (July 2020)
- Markers  (Oct 2021)

All three posts have one thing in common: No response from Agisoft!

I find that the discrepancy between 4000 and 200  in pricing a little harsh, I'm willing to upgrade but a factor 20 is just a little outside of my budget!

Admittedly it would be difficult to decide which features would be included in a "medium" version so perhaps being able to pay to "unlock" desired extra feature would be even nicer.

Does Agisoft have any plans for such a version? Or some kind of plugin system? Perhaps a survey of Metashape users would also shed some more light on the matter....


My Bad - I think I now know what I did wrong: I was loading a batch workflow from a standard version of metashape. That is, I was using a batch workflow that was defined using a standard version into a pro version of Metashape - that caused the error I was observing.

So all good again :)


Bug Reports / Build Mesh: Custom Face Count (Pro version) - being ignored
« on: January 31, 2022, 11:23:07 AM »
Hi There,

I'm testing the pro version and noticed a strange thing when building the mesh: the custom face count is ignored.

This is part of the way I generate different LODs and it works fine in the standard version but in the pro version this setting is ignored.

Is this part of the trial-period pro-version or is this setting being ignored in general?

Version 1.8.0 of both (standard and pro)


General / Re: LODs and Metashape
« on: August 09, 2021, 01:54:07 PM »


Ah ok then I misunderstood. So the quality would be the same regardless of vertex/face count.

Does CloudCompare generate smooth meshes, i.e. comparable to want meshroom does? That would be ideal.

Either way, I'll have a look and give it a try.


I had a quick look at an existing project and for me I could only select a different source for an Occlusion map?

And can I have multiple meshes/models in one chunk? If so how! :) That would be great and would save me
duplicating chunks for the LODs.

Thanks to both of you for the help :thumbsup:

General / Re: LODs and Metashape
« on: August 09, 2021, 12:28:41 PM »
Thank you for those tips :)

I've used MeshLab but had not heard of CloudCompare, I will have a look.

I do want to avoid baking textures - have to be honest - and since I'm reducing the mesh by 90% in some cases, I would assume that the vertex colours won't
be enough to bake a detailed texture, so I would really want to use the original photos.

I think I might have found a third approach and that would be to limit the number of faces/vertices when building the mesh - basically going up one step in my
workflow. So instead of decimating the mesh, I would create smaller meshes right from the start. That would also remove one step from my workflow - i.e. the decimation

I'll have a try of that and see how that goes!

Thanks again and Cheers!

General / LODs and Metashape
« on: August 05, 2021, 12:23:19 PM »
TL;DR: Is there a way to improve the quality of decimated meshes in Metashape?

I've been using Metashape (standard) for a while now and have began thinking about my workflow. In particular generating
various LOD (Level of Details) for each model. I post my models on SketchFab and noticed that, those users
that sell their models, have packs with various LODs (mostly various sized textures and reduced vertices/face counts).

To do the same, I've come up with a workflow to support various LODs:

1. define a single chunk with all photos
2. align those photos, generate dense cloud and mesh.
3. duplicate the chunk including all details  - one duplicate for each LOD
4. define a batch workflow which decimates and texturises the mesh for each LOD. I.e. a 4k+150k LOD decimates
the mesh to max 150k faces and generates a 4096 texture. this is possible since each step is limited to a specific chunk.
5. finally all models are exported using various placeholders in the filename

This works quite well except for the quality of the mesh. The decimated mesh has a lot of overlap in vertices and faces.
I have the feeling that the quality of a decimated mesh is never as good as the original. Is there a way to improve the
quality of the decimated mesh? I've tried refine mesh but that increased the vertex count  again.  Smooth mesh just
reduced the details of the mesh.

I ask because I've also used meshroom and noticed that the mesh there is perfect after decimation. In fact the mesh
produced by meshroom is a very constant even mesh.

Also I do a lot of post-processing in blender and it's a pain to clean up the mesh once for each LOD. So I want the best
quality mesh from metashape to reduce the amount of work I have in blender.

I initially began doing decimination in blender but then I have to rebake the texture. Which is basically a non-trival task!

Sorry for the long post & Cheers!

UPDATE: i've included a screenshot of the mesh differences, the highlighed mesh is meshroom.

Pages: [1]