Messages

1

General / Re: RAW file format - does it yet support it or still no?

« on: May 12, 2023, 05:40:10 PM »

Well to add to my original question... So far i always worked with 8 bit (LZW or whatever compresion) TIFs... (converted from NEF raw files via Adobe Lightroom)
I tried 16 bit TIFs but didnt see any difference really (but i tried only few tests).

I run across people online who say that you should use only 16 bit TIFs (and not 8 bit TIFs), that you get superior results...

Is it really true...? My tests back then (although only few and im not sure i tests everything (like dense point cloud "quality", mesh "quality", texture "quality" etc.) back than i didnt see really any improvements or just TINY imporvement (when using 16 bits tifs) so i never used 16 bit tifs again, just sticked to using 8 bits...

Is 16 bits really that much better...? In what way...? More detailed dense point cloud? More detailed mesh? More detailed texture? Or just texture with more depth (allowing you to play with highlights and shadows in the texture even after its generated?)

2

General / Re: HANDHELD photogrammetry, high ISO, AI denoise... Doable/Advisable...?

« on: May 01, 2023, 07:25:30 PM »

thanks

so what shutter speed you usually use/get...?

3

General / Re: HANDHELD photogrammetry, high ISO, AI denoise... Doable/Advisable...?

« on: May 01, 2023, 12:49:03 AM »

I am always doing outdoor photogrammetry without a tripod to be much faster, for hobby purposes. I'm using a Sony A6400 with a Sigma 16mm at f/5.6, Auto ISO to scan pretty large statue / things.
When I don't have the camera with me I use my iPhone 11, less details, but better than nothing.

well... thats nice :-), but you didnt say how the scans compare with your tripod scans (at home or outdoors)...?
are they comparable...? (you do do sometimes "proper" scans with tripod etc...?)  shooting in shadows or on a cloudy day... whats the ISO you use (most often) and the shutter speed?

thanks

4

General / HANDHELD photogrammetry, high ISO, AI denoise... Doable/Advisable...?

« on: April 30, 2023, 06:55:24 PM »

HANDHELD photogrammetry, high ISO, AI denoise... Doable/Advisable...?

Hello, is doing photogrammetry with Handheld Mirrorless DSLR (Cannon EOS M200), handheld, high ISO (800 lets say) and using newest AI denoise in Lightroom Classic possible...? Like will it look good? NO tripod involved (thus the need for high ISO setting in order to get at least 1/100s+ shutter speeds to hopefully NOT get blurry images) ...?
I have currently Nikon D3200 which i use at home "studio" with tripod for photogrammetry for various objects/props i bring home. I was few times (like 2x times over the span of like 7 years (!)) in the terrain/outside with the camera and tripod... Only like 2x times over 7 years (!!). I always tell myself i will go exclusively a on photoscanning "journey"/trip to the city (i live in village) with the camera and tripod to scan objects i cannot bring home, but over the 7 years (!) i just never went, never "had the time" etc...

SO... i was thinking of getting a 2nd camera (Cannon EOS M200), PURELY for the purpose of "photogrammetry on the go" - to have a camera with me whenever i leave home for the city/outside. Its a smaller camera, so i can have it always with me and if i see something worth scanning (or just shooting for texture purposes) i will pull out the camera and "handheld" scan it... No more telling myself - "Oh... this is nice... ill come later back here with my Nikon and tripod and scan it"... Guess what - i NEVER DID, and thus "lost" the model/scan opportunity... (Few times I tried using a cheap smartphone i always have on me , but the scans are just not good...)

My question is: Is it worth it...? Like will the resulting scans be any good and more or less comparable with my nikon D3200 tripod scans...? Cause with the Cannon EOS M200 i will have to shoot without tripod (and even monopod), just handheld... Can you get a good looking scan handheld with such mirrorless camera...? Depending on the lighting, i will have to probably take majority of shoots with ISO 800, F8-F11, in order to prevent blurry images due to handholding the camera... I should be able to get at least shutter speeds of 1/100 sec and higher (1/125 etc.)... This should be enough to prevent blury images right...? I will denoise the high (800) ISO in lightroom classic using the newest AI denoise feature...

So could it be done, will the final scan be "any good" and comparable/ more or less the same quality as if done with a tripod at home...?

(will use agisoft metashape probably for the photogrammetry)

EDIT:

OR... can i shoot in full sun now these days? It was adviced that you should do scanning in shadow or when the sky is cloudy to get even lighting on your model... This is what i have always done, the downside is that there is LESS light entering the camera in these conditions, so you have to use tripod or high ISO settings... OR... did the "delighting" technology got so good over the years (i started 3d scanning like in 2015 or 2017 (?)), that you can now scan in full sun and auto remove the shadows later on with specialized tech ( i know agisoft metashape has some delighiting tools (2 seperate i think), Unity has some delighting tools, and there are probably others)... Did the delighting got so good over the years, that you can now shoot in full sun?

5

General / Re: RAW file format - does it yet support it or still no?

« on: April 24, 2023, 05:00:06 PM »

I've been using raw files (DNG format) in Metashape for years now with no problem.  Whether it can read brand-specific formats like PEF or NEF I don't know, but I doubt it.
cheers
Bill

ok that interesting... so metashape CAN  use raw formats (DNG), just not ALL raw formats (like NEF)... :-(

why not NEFF :-(?

6

General / RAW file format - does it yet support it or still no?

« on: April 20, 2023, 04:52:22 PM »

Does Agisoft Metashape finally support RAW file formats (either from Cannon, NEFFs from Nikon or some other RAW file formats)...?

Or is it still a NO (it does NOT support them)...?

Will it ever support them? Why not? Seems good to support it, you can skip the exporting from Lightroom to TIFF "inter-step" if you dont need to export TIFFs and just use (maybe a bit altered) RAWs...?

7

Texture De-Lighter / Re: Difference between StandAlone Delighter and "Remove Lighting" from MetaShape?

« on: November 12, 2020, 04:23:57 PM »

Thanks

Two additional questions :-):

1)Is the removl of lighting only single threaded? Regarding the CPU, it uses only one core (and not all available cores)?
2) Is there a way to export the AO map the program automatically generates ("in the background") while delighting?

8

Texture De-Lighter / Agisoft Delighting vs Unity Delighting Vs Substance Alchemist Delighting?

« on: August 28, 2020, 01:02:33 PM »

Hello

Just a quick question, Agisoft offers Delighting in Metashape and in standalone Agisoft Delighter, how does it offer with other Delighting methods that are there...? Mainly i know (and talking about) Delighting in Unity engine and delighting using the Substance Alchemist aplication... ARe they more or less the same or is one significantly better/worse?

Thanks

9

Texture De-Lighter / Re: Difference between StandAlone Delighter and "Remove Lighting" from MetaShape?

« on: August 28, 2020, 12:59:41 PM »

thank you for reply

Is there any reason why full functionality of Deligter (including removing cast shadows and painting on geometry) is not defaultly present right in Metashape itself too?

Also, even though you say remove shading from Delighter is something like the remove lighting feature directly in Metashape; Remove Lighting in metashape offers you an option to use AO map (that you have to bake in other application like Xnormals for example)... "Remove Shading" in Delighter doesnt have the option to choose an ambient occlusion map. But i noticed somewhere in the info/console displayed information that during processing it says something like "calculating" Ambient Occlusion... So... do i understand it correctly that Delighter actually computes its own AO map on the fly and uses it for deligting...? Thus its "easier" to use then Remove lighting in Metashape since there you have to use and external aplication (Xnormals) to bake the AO map? When in comparison Delighter computes the AO map "in-house", internally?



Thank you

10

Texture De-Lighter / Re: Difference between StandAlone Delighter and "Remove Lighting" from MetaShape?

« on: August 27, 2020, 07:11:54 PM »

For example, i read the tutorial for delighter that is here:

https://www.agisoft.com/index.php?id=71

But when i downloaded and run Delighter it seems that the tutorial is made for some "older" version, since the one i downloaded (1.6.4) seems to have additional feature for removing lighting.

While the version in tutorial has "Parameters" under its control "Tab" window. The version i downloaded seems to have two separate "features" under its control tab (right side), and not just one as the tutorial describes. These are "Remove Cast Shadows" (which is quite self explanatory) and "Remove Shading" (with AO "tickable" option). My questions are:

1) What is this new feature "Remove Shading"?
2) The version of Delighter in the tutorial didnt yet have this feature? (or did you take the original process and splitted it into two separate functions?)
3) This "RemoveShading" feature doesnt requite you to draw on the model, right?

11

Texture De-Lighter / Difference between StandAlone Delighter and "Remove Lighting" from MetaShape?

« on: August 27, 2020, 06:37:26 PM »

Hello
I would like to know whats the difference between the standalone (free) aplication "Agisoft Delighter" and the "in-built" tool/feature named "Remove Lighting" in Agisoft Metashape...?
Both "tools" seem quite different (in agisoft delighter you have to directly pain in the model), in agisoft metashape "Remove Lighting" feature you dont have to paint on the model (or to be precise- you CANNOT even if you wanted)).

So... What are the differences? Why have two "different tools", why not include delighter "painting" directly in agisoft metashape please?

Thank you

12

Camera Calibration / Re: How much does Camera Calibration help in regards to quality?

« on: August 27, 2020, 06:36:22 PM »

Ah interesting... so if im a scanning a "normal object" = rich texture and a lot of photos, theres really no reason the use the camera calibration?

BUT... if i have a model that failed to allign the photos (for reason that i have few photos or that the texture of the object is rather "plain" (missing details) than i could think about the camera calibration and it might help to allign the photos (that didnt allign originally).

Do i understand this correctly?

Thank you

13

Camera Calibration / Re: How much does Camera Calibration help in regards to quality?

« on: August 27, 2020, 02:22:08 PM »

Nobody knows; can answer that please ?

14

General / Re: How to clean a "mess of (not just) floating "garbage" points"?

« on: July 22, 2020, 11:28:28 PM »

Im not sure how to generate points with confidence...? I dont see that option ("tick") there when generating dense point cloud (in that dialog window)

The only options in the "Build Dense Cloud" options window i see, in the "advanced section" are Depth Filtering, Reuse Depth Maps and Calculate Point Colors.... I dont see any "Calculate point confidence" or whatever there... (im using 1.5.5 Metashape)...

15

General / How to clean a "mess of (not just) floating "garbage" points"?

« on: July 19, 2020, 05:44:41 PM »

In Agisoft metashape (photoscan), is there a way how to clean a mess of (not just) floating points? After generating dense point cloud you get a lot of "mess points" (pictures below) - some are floating, some are "connected" to the main shape... These are "garbage points", is there some "automated" solution/feature of how to get rid of them...? Sure i do it by hand but it costs a lot of time... Any feature/worfklow/function in agisoft how to get rid of them quickly/automaticaly...? (at least partially)...?
If agisoft doesnt have such feature (in which version?) is there some other software that can clean this easily?

https://postimg.cc/d7Y3G8kf

https://i.postimg.cc/TPybM0RT/garbagepoints.jpg

Thanks