Forum

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 - Arie

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
General / Re: 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 11, 2021, 04:18:26 PM »
I just released a similar image set under CC-BY-NC 4.0 for testing and comparing to other software. I have some high-res 3D-scans of that model, so it's great for comparison.

JPEG (2x 2GB) incl. masks
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qe1jZg6iZ_yeZ865VL83KXpsV5Xifih1?usp=sharing
RAW (6x 2GB) incl. masks
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EJQpSnqHu3XSb7R4FmJzuRB5O8ixXwka?usp=sharing

2
General / Re: 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 10, 2021, 03:38:50 PM »
Why shouldn't we be able to mention other software?
While I am definitely on your side here, it just seems like the wrong place to discuss competing software packages on the forum of one of the competing solutions. I would much rather prefer such discussion to take place on more neutral grounds, similiar to what is being done on laserscanningforum.com.

One thing I really appreciate about Agisoft is the way they interact with their users, particularly on this forum. They are very receptive to feedback and constructive criticism, which ultimately makes their product better.
I completely agree with you. That's why I also "dared" to add the processing time of a competitor to give some feedback on the improvements but also to show that there is still room for further optimizations.

3
General / Re: 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 08, 2021, 11:51:09 AM »
Mak,
this build has a free Pcie slot that's just waiting for the 3080ti to be released :D

4
General / Re: 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 08, 2021, 04:16:42 AM »
Let's just say there aren't many other programs out there that are quite a bit faster than Metashape... I don't think we should elaborate on other software here.

5
General / Re: 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 08, 2021, 03:28:14 AM »
Hi Mak,
i've made the same observation regarding the additional geometry on the inside.
The image set is made up of 258 61mpx images shot with a 90mm lens on full-frame.
System is a Threadripper 3960X, 256GB 3000mhz DDR4, 1x 1080ti, 2x Samsung Evo Plus NVMe 1TB Raid0, Win 10 Pro.
Anything else?
Cheers!

6
General / 1.7.0. Results of reworked depth maps generation algorithm
« on: January 07, 2021, 11:42:26 PM »
Hi Agisoft team,
congratulations on the 1.7.0 release. I've been doing some comparisions between 1.6.5 and 1.7.0 and I thought I would share the results.

Agisoft 1.6.5: 12h 8m (Depth maps 9h 57m, Meshing 2h 11m)
Agisoft 1.7.0: 7h 14m (Depth maps 5h 9m, Meshing 2h 5m)
Competitor: 5h 11m (Depth maps 3h 5m, Meshing 2h 6m)

In general the improvements are quite impressive: Significantly shorter processing times with more detailed results. In addition, the stepping effect visible in some of the 1.6.5 images vanished.
But some areas of the 1.7.0 model show artefacts that were not present in 1.6.5 (last image). Any fixes in sight?

Also I am very impressed on how much Metashape has caught up to their main competitor. Keep it going! <3
Cheers!

7
General / Re: How to get the most detail in Texture?
« on: January 05, 2021, 03:43:30 PM »
Hi,
if you increase your texture size, there will be more details visible. I quite often use 8192 or even 16384 px as texture size.
Cheers

8
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 05, 2021, 03:41:18 PM »

Hey Alexey, can you explain what Generate Defocus Masks is?

Also very interested to know what this does and how it works.

Thanks,
JRP

Hi jrp,
I did some tests with this feature and it creates a mask in out-of-focus areas of the image. It seems to be similiar to Photoshops "Focus Area" tool, where based on local contrast etc. blurred parts are masked but it seems to be more sophisticated since you require a scaled model for the mask to work.
The results are great and this is super useful for creating textures without having to deal with out-of-focus areas being mapped to the texture.
This could also be useful when working with small objects where depth of field is always a problem: Create a rough, scaled model with all images, run the filter, realign with created masks (excluding feature detection on masked areas) and then running the high-res reconstruction. But I'm sure Alexey will clarify the use cases.
Thanks Agisoft team! Great update <3

9
General / Re: Artifacts in DEMs derived from scanned air photos
« on: November 18, 2020, 12:05:35 PM »
I've had this before and it was due to a slight misalignment of the camera pose. For me, disabling generic preselection solved this issue. Of course, the alignment time was a looot longer.
Cheers.

10
Feature Requests / Re: Feature Request : Logfile per Project
« on: November 18, 2020, 12:03:59 PM »
+1
Having the logfile stored in the project file would be very convient!

11
Hi PolarNick,
I updated the original post. Seems as if there were some internal changes.
Cheers!

p.s. I've noticed with another datasets (UAV images), that the reduction in processing times between checked/ unchecked seems to be largely dependend on the type of data acquisition- I'm still doing some testing, will update.

12
Hi all,
actually this is not a bug but more of a heads-up to fellow Metashape users.

I'm currently running some tests to compare different settings. During my test, I noticed a significant boost in performance when checking "Use CPU when performing GPU accelerated processing" even though it says "When using dedicated GPUs please turn off ... CPU for optimal perfomance".
Here are the times (Metashape 1.6.5):

Unchecked:          6 hours 25 min (Depth maps), 32min (Build model)
Checked:               4 hours 9 min (Depth maps), 32min (Build model)
Unchecked 1.7:  1 hours 56 min (Depth maps), 35 min (Build model)
Checked 1.7:       2 hours 8 min (Depth maps) , 32 min (Build model)
 
Additional information: 269x 36mp images of a animal skull (i.e. turntable style data acquisition). Depthmap-based reconstruction in ultra high quality.
System: Threadripper 3960X, 256GB 3200 CL16, 1080ti, Samsung Evo Plus 970 Raid0 2TB.

My guess for the significant increase in performance is the high CPU core count of the 3960X. So it might be only helpful when using an HEDT system.
What I also find very interesting is the additional performance improvement of 1.7.0.11429. Speed-wise this is on-par with competing software. I'll be posting some comparisions in the 1.7 thread.
Hope this helps someone.
Cheers,
Arie.

13
General / Re: Dense Point Cloud Processing cut off a lot of points
« on: October 27, 2020, 01:17:45 PM »
IMO the water surrounding the pier is responsible for no points being reconstructed since the waters surface appearance changes between each image.
If you want the pier to be reoncstructed, you could try masking out all water for the images in the immediate surrounding of the pier.
Cheers!

14
Hi again,
i'm not sure how well this works with Metashape, but you can generate topographic height contours and import them into AutoCAD. If Metashape creates proper 3D-polylines, it should give you a nice, simplified version of the excavation.
I know it is possible in Cloudcompare. You could also generate cross-sections, export them as polyline and use in CAD. I'll be happy to send you a link to that tool. I'm not sure if I can post it here.
Cheers!

15
Hi,
have you tried updating your graphic card drivers? Is the GPU detected by Metashape?
Cheers!
p.s. as a general rule, your texture size should be a power of 2 i.e. 2048x2048, 4096x4096 etc. It helps performance.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9