Messages

1

General / Re: Disappointing performance results on new MacBook Pro M1 Max

« on: March 23, 2022, 01:38:09 PM »

just to reactivate this thread: I am pretty much blown away by the speed of Agisoft Metashape (1.8.2) on a M1Max - it seems to be as fast as a fully specced workstation with a full RTX2080Super GPU configuration.  My findings are here:
http://jenacopterlabs.de/?p=1572&preview_id=1572&preview_nonce=bebd602a10&preview=true&_thumbnail_id=1579

kind regards! Sören Hese

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting results.

2

Feature Requests / Re: Coded markers: adjustable page size, custom location for numbering

« on: September 07, 2021, 10:57:42 AM »

Hi Nola,

There is a simple workaround. Use Adobe Illustrator to open the PDF. It is read as a vector graphic, which means you can then scale it to the size you want without loosing any quality (no need to make them so big in Agisoft Metashape). You can then also adjust the paper size.

I assume it also works with Inkscape which is a free and open source alternative to Adobe Illustrator.

All the best.

Regards,
SAV

3

Python and Java API / Re: Get ruler coordinates

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:46:47 AM »

Good to know. Thanks Alexey.

4

Feature Requests / Re: HEIC image format

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:43:18 AM »

+1

5

Feature Requests / Re: Better Marker Auto detection documentation

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:42:58 AM »

+1

A generally more sophisticated marker detection algorithm (see OpenCV) would be handy.

6

Feature Requests / Re: Close Holes - Within Selection

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:39:58 AM »

+1

7

General / Re: Close-range photogrammetry terminology

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:35:06 AM »

Hi mjferrell,

@rbnkc: Photogrammetry itself is a very dated term too 

I personally wouldn't have any issue if the term Close Range Photogrammetry was used in a manuscript (unless you were referring to an aerial survey as close range).

Just some other terms to throw into the mix:

UAV photogrammetry: where images are acquired by UAV
Aerial photogrammetry: Imagery acquired from the air (helicopter, UAV, fixed wing, balloon)
Terrrestrial photogrammetry: Imagery acquired from the land
SfM-MVS: Structure from Motion Multiview Stereo; referring to the technique / algorithms used in Digital Photogrammetry
Digital Photogrammetry: Photogrammetry using digital imagery and SfM algorithms
PhoDar: Photo + Lidar; also sometimes used to refer to digital photogrammetry because you get point clouds similar to a LiDAR scan

Personally I would simply refer to it as Digital Photogrammetry. The manuscript itself will then put it into the right context (within the methodology section).

All the best.

Regards,
SAV

8

General / Re: CGP's and altitude

« on: September 06, 2021, 11:23:03 AM »

Hi aerial_survey,
 
According to your screenshot your markers are at around Z=80m and your DJI drone camera coordinates say Z=185m. The marker errors as listed in the table are less than 2.5cm (largest value is 0.024205m), which is excellent , as already mentioned by Alexey.

For example, the ground sampling distance (GSD) for a survey flown with a DJI Phantom 4 Pro at AGL=100m is 2.7cm per pixel. The rule of thumb is that your error is around 1-3 times your GSD.

Regarding the difference of 10+cm as highlighted in the picture. I think you might have forgotten to recompute the DEM / depth maps after optimizing the camera alignment. Optimization only affects the sparse point cloud, which means it is crucial to run it BEFORE computing  any other datasets such as the DEM, depth maps, dense point cloud or orthophotograph.

In cases where you have already computed the DEM/dense point cloud etc you will have to rerun these steps after doing the optimisation.

All the best.

Regards,
SAV

 

9

General / Re: Metashape on Apple Silicon

« on: September 06, 2021, 10:58:05 AM »

Very much looking forward to this update 
Autumn (in Europe) is just around the corner, hence can't be long until it's available.

10

General / Re: Ipad Lidar Data

« on: September 06, 2021, 10:56:01 AM »

Hi Gibs21,

Import your LiDAR point clouds into CloudCompare (free & open source) and then use the 2.5D Volume tool to compute the volume.

More details here:
https://www.cloudcompare.org/doc/wiki/index.php?title=2.5D_Volume

Best regards,
SAV

11

General / Re: RTK + single GCP

« on: June 22, 2021, 02:53:36 AM »

Hi tom_rc33,

P4 RTK with base station (= internally consistent; cm accuracy) + 1 accurate GCP to shift the model works.
However, to do it manually is quite complicated and time-consuming in Agisoft Metashape Pro.

But with Python scripting it can be done

Best regards,
SAV

Hi,

I've recently started working on a project with an RTK setup (DJI Phantom 4 Multispectral + DJI D-RTK 2 base station). My understanding is that this sort of RTK positioning will be centimetre-precise and internally consistent, but may be offset in real world coordinates by some decimetres.

I have read that this uniform offset can be corrected using a single GCP (e.g. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9020172). This would be great because we are operating in an environment where, due to time and access limitations, we can only place a single GCP.

My plan was to use the RTK camera positions during image alignment to obtain a precise geometry, and then introduce the single GCP during the camera optimisation process. Effectively, I want perform a translation on my dataset to align it with the single GCP.

However, after going through the full Metashape processing chain it appears that the GCP marker still reports nearly a metre of error, which I can see when I export the orthophoto and view it in GIS software. After searching this forum, I'm thinking my problem may be that I do not uncheck the photos in the Reference window before performing an optimisation, leaving Agisoft to try and model both the camera positions and GCP position together. Is this the case? If so, my new processing chain would look as follows:

• Import photos (and RTK camera positions)
• Align photos
• Import GCP and mark in photos.
• UNCHECK all photo locations. < I currently do not this
• Optimise cameras
• Dense cloud, DEM, ortho, etc.

Is this the case? Or would unchecking photo locations before performing an optimisation mean that I 'lose' the benefits of drone RTK positioning?

Thanks in advance!

12

Python and Java API / Re: Some user interaction / dialog box basics

« on: February 10, 2021, 05:28:18 AM »

That's very useful. Thanks for sharing   

Regards,
SAV

13

General / Re: Plans for detailed manual?

« on: December 01, 2020, 06:09:14 AM »

HI Ashalota,

Please see my answers below:

Are there any plans to release a detailed manual for Metashape? I've been using it for several years now, and eventually figured out different tricks to get my photo alignments working out exactly as I'd like, but there are still so many features that are a complete mystery to me.

I agree, it takes quite some time to get 'the hang of it'. A concise but detailed manual would be handy to have. The forum helps a lot though.

I would really appreciate an overly detailed manual describing every option available and things to consider when choosing them.

Some questions I have right now, with no idea how to solve them, for example:

1) When I add markers are control points between images, align photos, and the resulting Reference pane shows no lat/lng for many of my markers, what does this mean?

It will show estimated lat/lon for these markers if you switch to VIEW ESTIMATED in the reference pane.

2) How does the accuracy option in "Align Photos" affect the results? I can't tell what exactly it does, recently I selected "Highest" (total errror 60m), "High" (total error 4m) "Medium/Low/Lowest" (total error 3m) and am not sure how to interpret this result

Changing this setting is not really changing the accuracy but the resolution of the imagery for the identification of  key points / tie points which are subsequently used to align the pictures. Accuracy HIGH means that the image is used at full resolution. Medium means the pictures is downscaled by factor of 4 (half length & half width of picture).

3) If adding manual markers, how badly can I mess up the results if I place them incorrectly? Huge issue, minor issue, etc?

Depending on the set marker accuracy (default is 0.005m) it can have a major influence on your reconstructions results because the accuracy is basically used as a 'weight' where more accurate reference information counts more than less accurate information. Also, if you deactivate a marker in the reference pane then it won't have any influence at all.

4) Does splitting my data into smaller chunks first negatively affect the output, or can it be helpful? My dataset is usually long aerial transects and personally I found best results when splitting into smaller pieces, but I don't really understand why.

Can help to speed up processing (especially for bigger projects processed on 'smaller' computers). Agisoft has a free python script to help with this process.

Etc... There are so many questions, based on not fully understanding how the program works. A very detailed manual would be an excellent resource to keep on the bookshelf! Thanks.

Regards,
SAV

14

General / Re: First UAV for archaeological surveying on a budget

« on: November 20, 2020, 01:33:41 AM »

Hi Dukytony,

I agree with previous comments.

Phantom 4 Pro for best quality

Mavic 2 Pro for best portability

I personally prefer the Phantom 4 Pro not just because of the better camera (which has a mechanical/global shutter) but also because it is sturdier/has less moving parts (no folding arms) and the fact that it has a landing gear which comes in handy to catch the drone in the air when you cannot land (e.g., tall grass). Also, I prefer the larger remote control of the P4 Pro.

Best regards,
SAV

15

General / Re: Best Laptop for Metashape?

« on: July 06, 2020, 06:53:58 AM »

No worries.
P53 is a solid choice too

Regards,
SAV