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 - mr map

Pages: [1] 2
General / Re: Altitude from EXIF in DJI Phantom 3 is negative
« on: November 20, 2018, 02:56:47 AM »
Thank you for the add-altitude script, Alexey. Very useful, especially when using photos from DJI P4.

General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.1.0 pre-release
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:32:50 AM »
Hello José,

It should look like the following sample:

Hi Alexay,
What will be minimum recognizable size of the four sector circle, in pixels?

General / Re: The size of coded markers for UAV acquisition
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:09:23 AM »

... In the next version of PhotoScan non-coded target automatic detection will be supported for the four-sector circles with white and black sectors.


Automatic aerial targets is a great feature  :)
What will be the minimum recognizable size of the target circle, in pixels?


Camera Calibration / Lens software - still available?
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:00:30 AM »
Since the re-make of Agisoft web site I am unable to find a download link for the Lens software.

Is it still relevant? (If yes, please direct me to the download link.)
Or does the Photoscan Pro resolve the distorsion parameters anyway during the optimize step in the workflow?

IF Lens is still available / relevant: How does it´s correction output perform compared to just letting the Photoscan Pro do it (in optimize step)?

/ Tom

General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: May 10, 2014, 01:54:08 AM »

Just sharing this if useful:

All these tests were run on

    Dell Precision T7600

Hi @pjennes,
It would be interesting if you would also publish the associated GPU performances, ie samples per second, please.
Cheers / Tom

General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: April 30, 2014, 12:12:05 AM »
And as for Building Dense Cloud in High, all other same as above:

Device 1 performance: 1062.14 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 2 performance: 1041.21 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 3 performance: 1043.3 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 4 performance: 426.897 million samples/sec (Quadro K5000)
Total performance: 3573.54 million samples/sec

Finished processing in 299.175 sec

Ultra high
Device 1 performance: 1115.57 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 2 performance: 1099.39 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 3 performance: 1111.38 million samples/sec (Hawaii)
Device 4 performance: 438.738 million samples/sec (Quadro K5000)
Total performance: 3765.07 million samples/sec

Finished processing in 2080.23 sec

/ Tom

General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: April 30, 2014, 12:00:59 AM »
Thank you for sharing, Ian, Wishgranter and all of you.

Now I would like to share the benchmark of my recent workstation build.
ASUS Z9 P8 WS, 2* Xeon 2687 v2, 3* R9 290X, 1* Quadro K5000.
1333 MHz RDIMM CL9. Win 8.1 64

Interesting observation:
The Build Dense Cloud computing (82 sec) in the above table was done with all CPU cores deselected (0/32 CPU cores in the OpenCL preference).

Selecting the recommended 24/32 resulted in 94 seconds processing time.
Selecting 32/32 active cores resulted in 101 seconds processing time.

/ Tom

Bug Reports / Re: OpenCL not all VRAM detected
« on: April 28, 2014, 01:33:48 AM »
I have the same ASUS motherboard and only 3GB is recognized on the 4GB GPU cards (R9 290X).
Only relevant VGA BIOS setting I could find is to set the VGA priority to onboard (MB) or offboard (Graphics cards) - and it is set to offboard.

Did you (or anybody else) find a solution to this?
(even if it will work fine with 3GB it feels like a waste, since these Radeon GPUs are installed solely for OpenCL purpose - the display monitors are on another GPU (Quadro).

/ Tom


i am using an ASUS Z9PE-D8-WS with Dual Xeon and Dual ATI 7970. Using latest drivers from ATI 13.251

In the Preferences i see only 2048Mb available for OPEN-CL processing, but i dont have any VGA enables in BIOS or anything, so it is quite strange aswell.

@Wishgranter: do you have any reccomendations?

Thanks and regards

General / Re: Stereoscopic viewport using hardware 3D?
« on: February 21, 2014, 02:02:10 PM »

Hello, you need NVIDIA® Quadro® professional graphics boards

View compatible cards here:

Out of curiosity, can anybody explain why PhotoScan and some other applications need the Quadro series (dual buffer) hardware to display (hardware supported) Stereoscopic Viewing? While I think today all high-end consumer graphics cards supports 3D stereoscopic displays, usable in gaming etc... presenting high quality high performance... (or don?t they?)

On a side note I read somewhere that it is possible to hack Nvidia cards/ drivers to make them function like a Quadro card, but not with "full" performance? So it appears to be a matter of drivers rather than hardware...) ???

And it would be just lovely if PS could display stereoscopic without requiring the Quadros...  ;)
Anaglyph, well, the quality and viewing comfort... not good enough.

General / Re: The High-end workstation or server for Agisoft PhotoScan Pro?
« on: February 19, 2014, 06:30:42 PM »
Forget this one  See PCI-E slots ammount.....

i have dual xeon board from Supermicro, rock solid and stable..... 24 RAM Slots and etc....

hard to say, but from  reading a lot on forums before my purchase was pointed to Supermicro... depend on what need to have, im think as its standard 2011 socket that you can use even Wcooling

 :o Wow!
Though liquid cooling would be tricky, this chassis is not designed to house radiators. Well of course, a true enthusiast might set up the radiators outside the case  ;D

General / Re: The High-end workstation or server for Agisoft PhotoScan Pro?
« on: February 18, 2014, 08:44:18 PM »

Quite a machine  :D
I like the 16 memory slots.
Do you have first hand experience with this one?
If so: Noise level? (it?s not suitable for liquid cooling...)
It would be nice if it had also USB3 and audio ports on the back. Then again this can be added with PCI cards...


General / Re: The High-end workstation or server for Agisoft PhotoScan Pro?
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:45:52 AM »

I looked at these Proliant servers.  (I am curious since I am about to invest in a PS workstation very soon).
Maybe server is a good choice for Photoscan use.... BUT:
I suppose they cannot be equipped with one or more high performing GPU, can they?
If not, is this not a serious con for the server alternative? (compared to a workstation setup)


General / Re: Computer requirements...
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:12:12 PM »
Whoa!!  :o

Guys, be really careful when configuring your combo of motherboard, CPU and MEMORY!
I became cautious after reading what Ian wrote here:
And you can see my posts later in the same thread.
What really got me suspicious was this:

I am currently about to purchase a dual Xeon 256 workstation and today my dealer got answer from ASUS regarding memory configuration on the ASUS motherboard I intended to buy:

"Full equipped DIMMs are reducing the speed.
The speed is also depending on the memory Voltage, but also the Ranks of the Module.

KVR13LR9Q4/32 can run @ 1.35V/1.5V and is Quad-Rank.
8pcs in Z9PE-D8 WS will reduce the speed to 800MHz."

800MHz!  :o

I was opting for:

But now I will have to rethink.
Any suggestions welcome.

Lambo, you might not run into this problem if you stay within 64GB, but anyhow, have it in mind and check it up before you order!  ;)

General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: January 11, 2014, 02:49:40 AM »
Wow Ian, thanks for prompt response!

So the two options I mentioned have almost equal PI, indicating the 1600MHz EC11 would probably not outperform 1333 EC9, not by much anyway.
So, all in all, considering that 256GB allows for bigger projects than 128GB, I am now leaning towards the 256GB/1333.

Memory                                                           [GB]    PI     PI * GB / $      USD
Kingston DDR3 1600MHz ECC/REG 128GB EC11   128   145,5     8,6               2158
Kingston DDR3 1333MHz ECC/REG 256GB EC9     256   148,1     8,6               4432

I for sure will stay tuned for your upcoming tests.
Tom  :)

General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: January 10, 2014, 09:55:07 PM »
I might get a chance to try the Mac Pro next week.  The boss just reviewed one, but I have to get him to give me remote access to test.  The 1866 C13 memory is going to kill performance though.  ECC JEDEC standards are pretty lax, which makes me wonder if you can put normal non-ECC memory in it for a bit of a boost (and the system will enable XMP too).

I love this thread! Glad so see you here, Ian  :D
Wishgranter - splendid initiative!

Looking forward to upcoming tests. Maybe to see what I did wrong  ::) since I will have to purchase my own workstation very soon - don't have time to wait for the test results  :-\

Right now I am pondering the memory issue.
Aiming for the modern workstation motherboard ASUS Z9PE-D8 WS, 2xSocket-2011 which has 8 memory slots. (Only registered/buffered memory when greater than 64GB.)

Either I could do
Kingston DDR3 1333MHz ECC/REG 256GB (8x32GB) LRDIMM 240-pin, 1.35v, CL9
Kingston DDR3 1600MHz ECC/REG 128GB (8x16GB) RDIMM 240-pin, CL11

Speculating that maybe not so many of my upcoming projects might need 256GB, I am tempted to go for the faster 128GB. But how much performance difference should I expect between these two options, in theory? Assuming the projects generaly would stay within the 128GB limit, and if bigger, splitting in chunks (does that sound reasonable?).

Processors likely to be 2x Intel Xeon E5-2687W v2 (8 cores each, 3,4GHz) and two watercooled R9 290X GPU.

Posting here since I figure it?s actually on topic and of general interest  :)

Pages: [1] 2