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 - 3D_Scan_Fan

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
General / Re: 1.8.0 produces softer meshes. Why?!
« on: November 24, 2021, 05:41:47 PM »
The latest build.

I can't share this dataset but I've tried this with others and they're all the same, soft meshes.

2
General / Re: 1.8.0 produces softer meshes. Why?!
« on: November 24, 2021, 04:02:14 PM »
It's definitely not noise and why it's only 1.8.0 that does this.

3
General / 1.8.0 produces softer meshes. Why?!
« on: November 23, 2021, 08:04:20 PM »
Hello everyone!

Maybe like some of you I am trying the preview release of Metashape, version 1.8.0. and wanted to show you the mesh results here compared to 1.6.4.

Reason why 1.6.4 because everything afterwards either has problems crashing and mesh generations has strange artifacts which makes no sense (particularly 1.7.3!).

Generating meshes in 1.8.0 are pretty good, it no longer produces those weird artifacts, however the results of the meshes tend to look soft (even when doing everything at the highest quality).

1.8.0


1.6.4

The details are still there but a little soft, but not as soft processing at half the resolution.

Despite this, it does really well in the more occluded areas, particularly behind the ears:

1.8.0


1.6.4

As you can see it was resolved the ear backs really well, no holes, no mesh interpolation, thus it's a lot more accurate.

Also to note it's faster, approx 40 mins on 1.8. compared to 1 hour on 1.6.4. Yet I can't comment if the speed has changed over the previous versions.
Nor can I make a solid statement if it being faster is because it's not producing higher quality meshes.

Regardless I feel this is once again another step-down from anything beforehand. Is there any reason as to why this is happening???  :(

4
General / Re: Depth Map scripts doesn't work anymore! :(
« on: October 26, 2021, 07:45:58 PM »
I can't post the whole log because it exceeds 20000 characters :(

This is what I get when it's stuck:

Code: [Select]
[GPU 1] Camera 97 tile #3/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 2.94 s = 35% propagation + 57% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 67% (not matched) - 5% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 26% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #1/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.126 s = 34% propagation + 38% refinement + 6% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 97 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 66% (not matched) - 3% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 30% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 97 tile #4/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.909 s = 31% propagation + 57% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 41% (not matched) - 4% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 54% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #2/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 3.15 s = 33% propagation + 57% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 97 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 42% (not matched) - 6% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 51% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 97 tile #5/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 2.432 s = 35% propagation + 54% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 53% (not matched) - 5% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 41% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #3/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.867 s = 31% propagation + 51% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 97 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 64% (not matched) - 2% (bad matched) - 0% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 34% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 97 tile #6/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 2.13 s = 30% propagation + 57% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] group 1/1: estimating depth map for 45/47 camera 111 (26 neighbs)...
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 58% (not matched) - 7% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 33% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #4/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.654 s = 35% propagation + 47% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 43% (not matched) - 11% (bad matched) - 3% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 41% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #1/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.539 s = 36% propagation + 46% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 29% (not matched) - 10% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 59% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #5/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 3.153 s = 35% propagation + 53% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 35% (not matched) - 7% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 56% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #2/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 2.311 s = 33% propagation + 55% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 47% (not matched) - 7% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 43% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #3/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.577 s = 34% propagation + 49% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 110 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 44% (not matched) - 12% (bad matched) - 3% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 40% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 110 tile #6/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.867 s = 32% propagation + 50% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] group 1/1: estimating depth map for 46/47 camera 114 (27 neighbs)...
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 70% (not matched) - 4% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 25% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #4/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.456 s = 32% propagation + 52% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 69% (not matched) - 4% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 25% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #1/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.528 s = 31% propagation + 48% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 28% (not matched) - 10% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 2% (no cost neighbors) - 59% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #5/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 2.385 s = 36% propagation + 53% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 29% (not matched) - 5% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 64% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #2/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 2.525 s = 32% propagation + 55% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 111 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 37% (not matched) - 15% (bad matched) - 3% (no neighbors) - 2% (no cost neighbors) - 43% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 111 tile #6/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.712 s = 38% propagation + 46% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] group 1/1: estimating depth map for 47/47 camera 117 (38 neighbs)...
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 55% (not matched) - 10% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 32% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #3/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.817 s = 33% propagation + 47% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 71% (not matched) - 3% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 24% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #1/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.684 s = 29% propagation + 51% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 51% (not matched) - 11% (bad matched) - 3% (no neighbors) - 2% (no cost neighbors) - 34% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #4/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.586 s = 35% propagation + 45% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 37% (not matched) - 4% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 59% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #2/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 3.08 s = 32% propagation + 59% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 15% (not matched) - 14% (bad matched) - 3% (no neighbors) - 2% (no cost neighbors) - 66% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #5/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 2.806 s = 37% propagation + 52% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 90% (not matched) - 1% (bad matched) - 0% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 8% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #3/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.634 s = 29% propagation + 57% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 2] Camera 114 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 70% (not matched) - 3% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 25% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 2] Camera 114 tile #6/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.848 s = 29% propagation + 52% refinement + 4% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 61% (not matched) - 5% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 32% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #4/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.709 s = 32% propagation + 53% refinement + 3% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 13% (not matched) - 12% (bad matched) - 2% (no neighbors) - 1% (no cost neighbors) - 72% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #5/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1792x1760) done in 3.411 s = 37% propagation + 55% refinement + 1% filtering + 0% smoothing
[GPU 1] Camera 117 samples after final filtering: 0% = 100% - 77% (not matched) - 2% (bad matched) - 1% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 20% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 0% (speckles filtering)
[GPU 1] Camera 117 tile #6/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 1.913 s = 28% propagation + 58% refinement + 2% filtering + 0% smoothing
[CPU 3] Camera 15 samples after final filtering: 61% = 100% - 31% (not matched) - 1% (bad matched) - 0% (no neighbors) - 0% (no cost neighbors) - 3% (inconsistent normal) - 0% (estimated bad angle) - 0% (found bad angle) - 3% (speckles filtering)
[CPU 3] Camera 15 tile #1/6: level #6/6 (x1 downscale: 1760x1760) done in 676.591 s = 36% propagation + 63% refinement + 0% filtering + 0% smoothing

Using two RX 580 8GB GPUs and still using driver version 18.6.1 because none of the new ones work with Photoscan 1.3.5..

5
General / Depth Map scripts doesn't work anymore! :(
« on: October 24, 2021, 02:34:08 AM »
Hi everyone,

I don't know if anyone has the same problem as me but I've been using version 1.6.3. for a majority of work for a long time, I recently tried out version 1.7.3. & 1.7.4. and loaded my buildDepthMap script to (of course) generate Depth Maps for my chunk. However to my surprise it kind of stayed stuck at around 30%. I would leave it on for almost an hour and it just wouldn't budge! I tried cancelling the process but it wasn't responsive afterwards, it just hanged on the progress window forever, thus I had to "kill" the software through task manager.
I was even looking at the log for it and the last bits of lines doesn't seem to indicate any error.

Code: [Select]
Metashape.app.document.chunk.buildDepthMaps(downscale=1, filter_mode=Metashape.FilterMode.MildFiltering, reuse_depth=False, max_neighbors=10, subdivide_task=True, workitem_size_cameras=60, max_workgroup_size=120)
I don't know which version started for this to happen but this is incredibly annoying, a newer version of Metashape meaning to be better but yet for something so simple and that's been around for a very long time all of a sudden has problems. If anything, I've noticed performance getting laggier ever since Photoscan version 1.3.5. (still my preferred), and still can't generate 16K textures through GPU, but that's another topic for another time.

Has anyone been experiencing this? and what might be the problem perhaps?

I would really appreciate the help...I can't figure it out!  :'(

6
Are there script changes between 1.6.3 and 1.7.3?

Everytime I do a BuildDepthMap it takes WAY too long and the depth maps come out incomplete :(

7
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 11, 2021, 03:40:38 AM »
I'm still getting the Error: ciErrNum: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE (-11) at line 1087 when trying to process Depth Maps :(

Might this be fixed by any chance??  :'(

8
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 08, 2021, 07:40:27 PM »
Also, any version after that is not compatible with Photoscan 1.3.5. because of the removal of Spir-1.2.

Funny enough, the last time I saw this similar problem was with newer version of the driver.

Hello 3D_Scan_Fan,

Metashape 1.7 uses hardware-accelerated textured from OpenCL API, which seems to be improperly supported in the drivers that you are using.

Is there any reason, why you need to use PhotoScan 1.3?

Every version from 1.6.5. and downwards work fine with the drivers I'm using.

As for Photoscan 1.3.5., I've probably explained to you in another post and in emails that there are aspects in that version (particularly the Alignment process) tends to be better.

I don't understand why now with 1.7 it gets broken.

9
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 06, 2021, 09:58:30 PM »
And?

They still work.

Also, any version after that is not compatible with Photoscan 1.3.5. because of the removal of Spir-1.2.

Funny enough, the last time I saw this similar problem was with newer version of the driver.

10
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 06, 2021, 09:31:21 PM »
Please find the log here:

Code: [Select]
2021-01-06 18:29:23 Agisoft Metashape Professional Version: 1.7.0 build 11736 (64 bit)
2021-01-06 18:29:23 Platform: Windows
2021-01-06 18:29:23 CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770K CPU @ 3.50GHz (desktop)
2021-01-06 18:29:23 CPU family: 6 model: 60 signature: 306C3h
2021-01-06 18:29:23 RAM: 31.9 GB
2021-01-06 18:29:23 OpenGL Vendor: ATI Technologies Inc.
2021-01-06 18:29:23 OpenGL Renderer: Radeon RX 580 Series
2021-01-06 18:29:23 OpenGL Version: 4.5.13521 Compatibility Profile Context 24.20.11021.1000
2021-01-06 18:29:23 Maximum Texture Size: 16384
2021-01-06 18:29:23 Quad Buffered Stereo: not enabled
2021-01-06 18:29:23 ARB_vertex_buffer_object: supported
2021-01-06 18:29:23 ARB_texture_non_power_of_two: supported
2021-01-06 18:29:23 Using simple console. Rich console can be enabled in Preferences dialog.
2021-01-06 18:29:29 LoadProject: path = D:/My Projects/Photogrammetry projects/Ten24 FACS project/Test/Test.psx
2021-01-06 18:29:29 Loading project...
2021-01-06 18:29:30 loaded project in 0.339 sec
2021-01-06 18:29:30 Finished processing in 0.342 sec (exit code 1)
2021-01-06 18:29:36 BuildDenseCloud: quality = Ultra high, depth filtering = Mild, PM version, point colors = 1
2021-01-06 18:29:36 Generating depth maps...
2021-01-06 18:29:36 Preparing 120 cameras info...
2021-01-06 18:29:37 cameras data loaded in 0.275 s
2021-01-06 18:29:37 cameras graph built in 0.05 s
2021-01-06 18:29:37 filtering neighbors with too low common points, threshold=50...
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Camera 41 has no neighbors
2021-01-06 18:29:37 avg neighbors before filtering: 61.9167 (73% filtered out)
2021-01-06 18:29:37 limiting neighbors to 40 best...
2021-01-06 18:29:37 avg neighbors before limiting: 16.4833 (0% limited out)
2021-01-06 18:29:37 neighbors number min/1%/10%/median/90%/99%/max: 0, 4, 7, median=14, 31, 40, 40
2021-01-06 18:29:37 cameras info prepared in 0.507 s
2021-01-06 18:29:37 saved cameras info in 0.012
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Partitioning 120 cameras...
2021-01-06 18:29:37 number of mini clusters: 10
2021-01-06 18:29:37 3 groups: avg_ref=40 avg_neighb=32 total_io=180%
2021-01-06 18:29:37 max_ref=48 max_neighb=41 max_total=89
2021-01-06 18:29:37 cameras partitioned in 0.001 s
2021-01-06 18:29:37 saved depth map partition in 0.004 sec
2021-01-06 18:29:37 loaded cameras info in 0.016
2021-01-06 18:29:37 loaded depth map partition in 0 sec
2021-01-06 18:29:37 already partitioned (48<=50 ref cameras, 26<=200 neighb cameras)
2021-01-06 18:29:37 group 1/1: preparing 74 cameras images...
2021-01-06 18:29:37 point cloud loaded in 0.005 s
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Found 2 GPUs in 0.203 sec (CUDA: 0 sec, OpenCL: 0.203 sec)
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Using device: Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere), 36 compute units, free memory: 8141/8192 MB, OpenCL 2.0
2021-01-06 18:29:37   driver version: 2580.6, platform version: OpenCL 2.1 AMD-APP (2580.6)
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max work group size 256
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max work item sizes [1024, 1024, 1024]
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max mem alloc size 4048 MB
2021-01-06 18:29:37   wavefront width 64
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Using device: Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere), 36 compute units, free memory: 8141/8192 MB, OpenCL 2.0
2021-01-06 18:29:37   driver version: 2580.6, platform version: OpenCL 2.1 AMD-APP (2580.6)
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max work group size 256
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max work item sizes [1024, 1024, 1024]
2021-01-06 18:29:37   max mem alloc size 4048 MB
2021-01-06 18:29:37   wavefront width 64
2021-01-06 18:29:37 Using device: CPU Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770K CPU @ 3.50GHz (using 2/8)
2021-01-06 18:29:38 Building kernels for Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere)...
2021-01-06 18:29:39 Device 1
2021-01-06 18:29:39 Program build log:
2021-01-06 18:29:39 Error: Undeclared function index 1028
2021-01-06 18:29:39
2021-01-06 18:29:39
2021-01-06 18:29:39 Failed to compile binary dumped to C:/Users/*/AppData/Local/Agisoft/Metashape Pro/cache/kernel_cache/pm_undistort_templated4098Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere)_FAILED
2021-01-06 18:29:39 Building kernels for Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere)...
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Device 1
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Program build log:
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Error: Undeclared function index 1028
2021-01-06 18:29:41
2021-01-06 18:29:41
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Failed to compile binary dumped to C:/Users/*/AppData/Local/Agisoft/Metashape Pro/cache/kernel_cache/pm_undistort_templated4098Radeon RX 580 Series (Ellesmere)_FAILED
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Finished processing in 4.427 sec (exit code 0)
2021-01-06 18:29:41 Error: ciErrNum: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE (-11) at line 1087
>>>

11
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 06, 2021, 09:21:08 PM »
Like before, I have two RX 580 graphic cards, both of which enabled.

Again, like before, I am using driver version 18.6.1.

All your recent versions up til 1.7.0. (maybe 1.6.5.) work with this older driver.

12
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: January 06, 2021, 08:16:39 PM »
I tried out your latest Metashape release, and it's still broken!

This is what I get from opening a previous project and trying to process a Depth Map.



Really disappointed by this :(

13
General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release
« on: October 14, 2020, 02:12:08 AM »
Can you explain:

• Added out-of-core processing support for dense cloud import, colorization and merging.

What does this mean?

14
General / Re: Building Mesh from Depth Maps became TOO slow! Why?
« on: March 28, 2020, 05:44:35 PM »
Yes i did come across your old topic on the matter, but you were still claiming that it was taking longer than it should on the preview build??

15
General / Re: Building Mesh from Depth Maps became TOO slow! Why?
« on: March 28, 2020, 05:04:56 PM »
It still doesn't make any sense as to how the performance decreased.

Also, in the change log between versions there's no indication that this was fixed in 1.6.2.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5