1
General / Re: European Architecture Video
« on: October 22, 2016, 03:22:13 AM »
Amazing work!
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.
2
General / Re: Sony Alpha 7R calibration (full frame sensor)
« on: October 20, 2016, 12:10:02 AM »
davidpmcg, The folks at Agisoft may have a different answer but I'm going to say, "no" - you don't need to do anything to calibrate for the new camera.
I say this based on my experience shooting models with a variety of cameras on the same shoot. I have shot people with crop sensors and full-frame sensors at the same time, fed all the images into Photoscan and had absolutely zero problem.
Jon
I say this based on my experience shooting models with a variety of cameras on the same shoot. I have shot people with crop sensors and full-frame sensors at the same time, fed all the images into Photoscan and had absolutely zero problem.
Jon
3
General / Re: Images of water at a river mouth
« on: October 17, 2016, 11:51:24 PM »
Pirate, Short of putting some unmoving markers in the water, I don't know of a quick fix. I'm no expert at water and land banks and all that but Photoscan will not recognize moving elements, and water is moving all the time and reflecting and essentially changing its form constantly.
Unmoving markers that are anchored to the land under the water would help you. Then Photoscan could grab those items. But they can't be floating (and therefore moving) or you will have the same problem as you are currently having.
Maybe someone with some more experience with the type of project that you are trying to do will be able to pass on some tips in addition to mine.
Jon
Unmoving markers that are anchored to the land under the water would help you. Then Photoscan could grab those items. But they can't be floating (and therefore moving) or you will have the same problem as you are currently having.
Maybe someone with some more experience with the type of project that you are trying to do will be able to pass on some tips in addition to mine.
Jon
4
General / Re: Questions about masking and editing the model
« on: October 17, 2016, 11:48:35 PM »
pontius, I don't think you're doing anything wrong necessarily. In my experience, this method of masking can sometimes give less than perfect results.
Try doing the masking again but this time by hand. Just draw a rough mask around your subject in each image using the Intelligent Scissors tool and then run the alignment again. Duplicate your chunk so that you don't lose all the work that you have done so far.
Jon
Try doing the masking again but this time by hand. Just draw a rough mask around your subject in each image using the Intelligent Scissors tool and then run the alignment again. Duplicate your chunk so that you don't lose all the work that you have done so far.
Jon
5
General / Re: Actual Difference On Mesh "Normal" VS fixed Lens (Nikon)?
« on: October 17, 2016, 11:46:34 PM »
JohnyJoe, Actually I've used a variety. I have used a Canon 50D with a Tokina 12-24mm lens and the same camera with a Canon 50-200mm lens.
I have also shot with a Nikon D70 and a 50mm full-frame prime lens.
Generally speaking, I never go near Ultra High. In that mode, I believe Photoscan is processing the images at full size and frankly, for me it takes too long. I always stick with High. Furthermore, I often start my basic alignment at Low and then work up to Medium and then finally to High. Sometimes, this seems to improve my results.
Dense cloud I always select High right from the get-go. I don't work that one up through the levels. I make very sure that my crop boundaries are adjusted to just fit the object so that no unnecessary processing is occurring.
I have also found that the use of "Gradual Selection" under the "Edit" tab is effective in zeroing in on what should be processed and what should be discarded. You can find an excellent writeup on that at this site:
https://dinosaurpalaeo.wordpress.com/?s=photogrammetry+tutorial+11
Hope this is helpful.
Jon
I have also shot with a Nikon D70 and a 50mm full-frame prime lens.
Generally speaking, I never go near Ultra High. In that mode, I believe Photoscan is processing the images at full size and frankly, for me it takes too long. I always stick with High. Furthermore, I often start my basic alignment at Low and then work up to Medium and then finally to High. Sometimes, this seems to improve my results.
Dense cloud I always select High right from the get-go. I don't work that one up through the levels. I make very sure that my crop boundaries are adjusted to just fit the object so that no unnecessary processing is occurring.
I have also found that the use of "Gradual Selection" under the "Edit" tab is effective in zeroing in on what should be processed and what should be discarded. You can find an excellent writeup on that at this site:
https://dinosaurpalaeo.wordpress.com/?s=photogrammetry+tutorial+11
Hope this is helpful.
Jon
6
General / Re: Alignment problem with static tripod and turnable model
« on: October 17, 2016, 11:37:56 PM »
CorentArt, You're very welcome!
What Patrick is saying is also a valid method of masking. The only drawback I have found is that sometimes the masks are not complete.
This method of hand-drawing in a rough mask I have found to be quicker and more effective. But it's a point of personal preference. You may try other masking methods that Photoscan offers and find any one of them to suit your workflow.
But that's great that you're off and running!
Bonne chance!
Jon
What Patrick is saying is also a valid method of masking. The only drawback I have found is that sometimes the masks are not complete.
This method of hand-drawing in a rough mask I have found to be quicker and more effective. But it's a point of personal preference. You may try other masking methods that Photoscan offers and find any one of them to suit your workflow.
But that's great that you're off and running!
Bonne chance!
Jon
7
General / Re: Close holes with texture
« on: October 17, 2016, 07:39:29 AM »
luisbonejo, Can you clarify why you can't shoot the bottoms of these rocks?
Jon
Jon
8
General / Re: Alignment problem with static tripod and turnable model
« on: October 17, 2016, 05:35:43 AM »
CorentArt, Hmmm... Don't despair! I think everyone goes through this.
Are you sure that you told Photoscan to recognize those masks? That would be in the Align Images dialog, in the Advanced section (you have to click on an arrow to see the advanced settings), under "Constrain Features by Mask".
Check that first and tell me what you find.
Jon
Are you sure that you told Photoscan to recognize those masks? That would be in the Align Images dialog, in the Advanced section (you have to click on an arrow to see the advanced settings), under "Constrain Features by Mask".
Check that first and tell me what you find.
Jon
9
General / Re: Actual Difference On Mesh "Normal" VS fixed Lens (Nikon)?
« on: October 17, 2016, 01:37:11 AM »
JohnyJoe, I don't have pictures but I have done both, meaning, shot with prime lens and zoom lenses.
Frankly, any difference is not discernible to me. And unless you're trying to make a model that's going to be tested under a microscope or is going to sit in front of a camera while an audience picks it to pieces, I don't think it matters.
I have made perfectly acceptable models with kit lenses. And I am talking about models that will go into a film and be projected on a big screen.
Jon
Frankly, any difference is not discernible to me. And unless you're trying to make a model that's going to be tested under a microscope or is going to sit in front of a camera while an audience picks it to pieces, I don't think it matters.
I have made perfectly acceptable models with kit lenses. And I am talking about models that will go into a film and be projected on a big screen.
Jon
10
General / Re: Exporting for presentation?
« on: October 17, 2016, 01:34:19 AM »
Robert, For what it's worth, I use 3ds max to present my models. I wouldn't say it's an easy program to master but is any 3D package easy to learn?
Alternately you could output as a pdf and show your stuff off that way. I've done that and you get a fairly accurate rendition of your model, in full colour and are able to dolly around it.
To answer your question about what quality, I always go with the highese available. Of course, that all hinges on having made the model at a respectable quality. You can always down-size it afterwards. You'll never be able to up-size it without ruining it to some degree.
Jon
Alternately you could output as a pdf and show your stuff off that way. I've done that and you get a fairly accurate rendition of your model, in full colour and are able to dolly around it.
To answer your question about what quality, I always go with the highese available. Of course, that all hinges on having made the model at a respectable quality. You can always down-size it afterwards. You'll never be able to up-size it without ruining it to some degree.
Jon
11
General / Re: Alignment problem with static tripod and turnable model
« on: October 17, 2016, 01:29:20 AM »
CorentArt, Yes - I can help you.
I believe you need to mask your images.
This is easier and quicker than it sounds.
In each image, use the "Intelligent Scissors" tool and draw a box around the subject. This can be loose. It does not have to be precisely lined up with the edge of your subject. Subject = that thing that you are trying to make a model out of.
Do this with each and every image. That should take about 10 seconds per image.
Then, in the "Photos" pane, switch to "mask" view. You do this by pressing the blue button at the top of the photos pane that looks like a square donut (for lack of a better comparison). You photos will switch to black and white images.
Right-click on one of these images and select "Invert Masks". A dialog box will pop up. Select "All Cameras" and then hit "Okay."
Now align the images again making sure that you select "Constrain features by mask" in the "Align Photos" dialog box.
If all goes according to plan and this was indeed the reason for your poor alignment, you will now have a sparse point cloud that roughly resembles your model and from which you can proceed to make a model.
The rule is that if your camera is static and there your background is unchanging, you must mask for Photoscan to be able to align.
Good luck with this.
Jon
I believe you need to mask your images.
This is easier and quicker than it sounds.
In each image, use the "Intelligent Scissors" tool and draw a box around the subject. This can be loose. It does not have to be precisely lined up with the edge of your subject. Subject = that thing that you are trying to make a model out of.
Do this with each and every image. That should take about 10 seconds per image.
Then, in the "Photos" pane, switch to "mask" view. You do this by pressing the blue button at the top of the photos pane that looks like a square donut (for lack of a better comparison). You photos will switch to black and white images.
Right-click on one of these images and select "Invert Masks". A dialog box will pop up. Select "All Cameras" and then hit "Okay."
Now align the images again making sure that you select "Constrain features by mask" in the "Align Photos" dialog box.
If all goes according to plan and this was indeed the reason for your poor alignment, you will now have a sparse point cloud that roughly resembles your model and from which you can proceed to make a model.
The rule is that if your camera is static and there your background is unchanging, you must mask for Photoscan to be able to align.
Good luck with this.
Jon
12
General / Re: Photo Sizing
« on: October 13, 2016, 03:41:03 AM »
Yeah - I don't blame you.
After a little bit you'll get used to how many photos you need (I overdid it wildly when I started), your ideal image size and proximity to subject, etc.
It's definitely a learning process. But very rewarding when it all comes together!
Jon
After a little bit you'll get used to how many photos you need (I overdid it wildly when I started), your ideal image size and proximity to subject, etc.
It's definitely a learning process. But very rewarding when it all comes together!
Jon
13
General / Re: Newby help.
« on: October 12, 2016, 08:27:02 AM »
leicarob, I don't think it's so much a matter of setting up Photoscan, meaning, Photoscan is what it is.
The more photos, the more RAM you will need. At a certain point you'll max out and that will be that.
You have the processor you have. So it will run as fast as it can unless you fool it into running faster than it thinks it should.
From a cursory inspection by a non-supergeek computer guy, I'd say you are all set with those specs.
If you haven't already, get out there and shoot something. Then run it through Photoscan and see how it does.
You'll only know what you're deficient in by putting the program through its paces under real-life conditions.
Jon
The more photos, the more RAM you will need. At a certain point you'll max out and that will be that.
You have the processor you have. So it will run as fast as it can unless you fool it into running faster than it thinks it should.
From a cursory inspection by a non-supergeek computer guy, I'd say you are all set with those specs.
If you haven't already, get out there and shoot something. Then run it through Photoscan and see how it does.
You'll only know what you're deficient in by putting the program through its paces under real-life conditions.
Jon
14
General / Re: Photo Sizing
« on: October 12, 2016, 08:22:42 AM »
Don't do it! 
Yes, it will affect the output. The more detail the better.
What are you concerned about? Your machine getting overloaded? If so, I understand.
If your machine is fine, Photoscan will inherently use "downsized" images for processing, depending on the quality level that you choose at each step of the process.
Jon
Yes, it will affect the output. The more detail the better.
What are you concerned about? Your machine getting overloaded? If so, I understand.
If your machine is fine, Photoscan will inherently use "downsized" images for processing, depending on the quality level that you choose at each step of the process.
Jon
15
General / Re: Lumpy surface reconstruction
« on: October 07, 2016, 08:52:04 AM »
I'll take an educated guess and say that your problem is that portions of your bone specimens have no texture. They seem to be beautifully white and smooth.
When I was shooting models (people) I'd have the same problem with the lumpiness. Wherever they had smooth blemish-free skin, I'd get a lumpy portion of my model.
How do you get around that? Can you project a texture onto your specimen and take 2 photos: one with the texture and oen without. Then use the textured photos for dense cloud and model creation and switch to the non-textured for creating your texture. You'd have to make sure the photos lined up of course.
That's one way around what I believe the problem is.
Jon
When I was shooting models (people) I'd have the same problem with the lumpiness. Wherever they had smooth blemish-free skin, I'd get a lumpy portion of my model.
How do you get around that? Can you project a texture onto your specimen and take 2 photos: one with the texture and oen without. Then use the textured photos for dense cloud and model creation and switch to the non-textured for creating your texture. You'd have to make sure the photos lined up of course.
That's one way around what I believe the problem is.
Jon
