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 - Hydro_Ydé

Pages: [1]
1
General / Re: 3D Web map publishing ?
« on: January 08, 2019, 04:42:03 PM »
Too bad you don't propose your own solution.
I tried these and was not convinced so far. But I keep looking, maybe updates were mad I do not know yet.

2
General / 3D Web map publishing ?
« on: January 06, 2019, 06:17:21 PM »
What would be the best option for 3D web map publishing ?
So far my best option is Propeller, but I do not need the photogrammetric calculation option, and it became a bit costly.
Lines / Surfaces / Volumes interactive measurement on 3D model is great there.
What else did you tried ? Is Agisoft planning such a function ?

Thanks ! 

3
Thank you Mks_gis for sharing this ! Have to try this.

Quick stop after "log file to check progress :" followed by a mixed / & \ file name.

4
General / Re: Your opinion on USGS Agisoft Processing Workflow
« on: August 16, 2018, 03:32:05 PM »
Thank you Andy for the response.
Much agreed about the art part, mapping is always also a bit of artistic creation.
I hope Tom will find some time to share his experience here. This field is still quite new, and at least we are happy to see that Photoscan is a good choice as the main tool for photogrammetry. Maybe we could also talk about pre and post PS workflow.

5
General / Re: UAS Mapping with DJI Phantom Pro 4 v2 elevation errors
« on: August 14, 2018, 12:20:34 PM »
You can have good results with P4P without PPK. How is you GCP distribution over the area ? I have one every 200m for quarries. First do global alignment with cameras and gcp checked, then optimize with gcp only. Have a close look on calibration result changes between the 2 phases, especially f.

6
General / Re: Your opinion on USGS Agisoft Processing Workflow
« on: August 11, 2018, 07:49:22 PM »
Thanks  BobvdMeij for this very interesting topic.
I found normal to clean the cloud at maximum level before including GCPs. That gives a clean "aero side only" solution before trying to adjust to real world coordinates. But that would not change a lot in my opinion to follow your own process (i.e. include GCP first).
Also the 0.1 parameter for Tie point seems very low for me, as I have often not so crisp images. 0.3 is better in my case.
One thing they don't mention is to have a look on camera calibration values. This is something I really look closely, i.e. values are consistant between various surveys. Big Z error can come from bad F value, even with good GCPs.

7
General / Re: Using scale bars for Pile volume measurement
« on: April 18, 2018, 06:49:41 PM »
How do you fix height with your distance meter ? This job needs a lot of known xyz points to be accurate.

8
General / Re: Field Camera Calibration Procedure
« on: April 18, 2018, 01:44:39 PM »
Hi Darko,

I do not work with PPK yet, but I tried also to determine the best camera calibration parameters. What I did was to disable all camera location (uncheck camears on reference panel) and keep only GCP locations, then run alignment. I found that I get much more constant camera parameters like this.
Working with P4P, I have sometime very large error in Z cam, and even with large values given to camera accuracy, final solution is greatly affected by these bad locations.
And of course it is very important to have a good set of camera parameters, in particular F value, who lead to large Z error if badly determined.

Pages: [1]