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 - harrytwomey

Pages: [1] 2 3
Feature Requests / Not enough memory; Resolution to save completed work
« on: December 01, 2023, 01:50:20 PM »
Would it be possible that when we get the "Not enough memory" error, due to the drive not having space to save (usually the mesh), we get an option to free up drive space and retry to save the data?
Currently, we can lose many, 10 to 20 or even more hours of processing, and need to retry.

Or a check of the drive to see if it has adequate space for the predicted file size


I Made a post a few days ago here
About the Difficult of navigating building internal in Agisoft Viewer

Our Clients seem to really like the Viewer, and we would like to give them more on it. Currently, we only give them building externals and aerial topo, but we would have the data for internals also just for making building plans or bim models. can can make the model with internal but there is no point if who can see it of measure stuff in the rooms

So my request is for so Method for seeing inside models like a Slice View or Section Planes or a Limit Box

It might be handy to have in metashape also

Agisoft Viewer / Agisoft Viewer, Navigate building internal
« on: June 17, 2023, 02:49:34 PM »

I created a tiled model from Laserscans only. it was scanned with a blk 360 and I noticed oddly extra triangulation off the limit of the scan data, kind of an umbrella effect. Its not so important really but odd so I tried masking the scans empty and run it again, which didn't help

I link here the 2 scan for anyone curious

Anyway I am really asking if there is a good way to navigate the inside of a building in the viewer, or something like a limit box or section planes for viewing the floors?

Also for whatever reason textured tiled model that get their texture for the greyscale intensity of laser-scan data, disappear when I zoom in. this happens in metashape and the viewer? i have to view them in solid

Was there any resolution to this? I just encountered the same issue using

8,000,000 Faces Mesh from 6063 align 4K images (Mavic 3E) and 131 E57 Laser Scans, which I attempted to refine with default settings (Quality=High/Iterations=10/Smoothness=0.50) and also with lesser settings of (Quality=Medium/Iterations=5/Smoothness=0.50) and got the same error (Can't open File: The Sysyme cannot find the path specified (3))

General / Re: Mavic 3E and Trimble X7 Alignment
« on: May 25, 2023, 01:36:25 PM »
2) When scanning, set the factor of the transformation directly in the scanner

May I ask what Scanner you use, I see in another topic to mention that you also use the Realworks Software. and generate floorplans. Seem we may be in the same line of work

I have Finished importing all the external scans and in this petical case where we have a generated flight where the photo where taken at close range, the two data sets seem to be aligned pretty well doing nothing else. See pictures of Medium Mesh Generated from Laser and Depth Maps

General / Re: Mavic 3E and Trimble X7 Alignment
« on: May 23, 2023, 10:14:35 PM »
My worry is why you get 40 mm error on GCPs on your drone Survey done at 7 m distance from building. This would give you around 2 mm GSD and a correct alignment/modelling should give errors around 2 to 4 mm not 40!

Apologies, this was in reference to the standard overhead topographical survey at 100m, which was off 40mm from GCP, vs the Laser scanning of the building which was off 5mm
Oddly, we processed this twice, in DJI Terra vs Metashape and the GCP error was 17mm vs 40mm, but that's an issue for another day.

My suggestion would be extract foto identifiable GCPS from your laser scan survey and use them to reference the Mavic3 chunk and then merge laser scan and drone chunk....

Question: In this case, how would I avoid issues with the two complete point clouds not blending perfectly? The Laser Scans are registered in Trimble Realworks which does not have a scale factor applied, and Metashape, working in my national grid, ITM  espg:2157, with undulation grid to Malin Head datum, would have the scale factor naturally accounted for in the processing. which would lead to a small scale difference in the two clouds. I have tried this before on another project and noticed that flat walls become very rough in the mesh generation because of the thickness of the cloud noise on a flat surface. This is what we refer to as a double skin in the pointcloud, where the two bands of pointcloud data which should be co-planar are offset some bit to cause bad issues.

Im Currently imported all the external Laser scan and all the photo to see if having more options for overlap helps the alignment


General / Re: Mavic 3E and Trimble X7 Alignment
« on: May 23, 2023, 06:10:47 PM »
Hello, and thank for the response

I see what you mean, I have been working with a limited set of my data for speed, to find something that works

What I actually have is a fully laser scanned building, about 700 scans, but I will limit to just the external that is closest to the facade of the building, which will be around 130 scan

We did a standard topographical flight and built an initial model and used the flight planner to make a path for the Mavik to fly at 7m distance from the building with the intention of making a high-detail model.
We have that processed ok, 3500 photos @ 24GB of imagery, but there are still some areas where the drone could get into, see Picture 1 below(shows bad matches I currently have)

the mavik dataset alone was off 40mm for GCP, whereas my Laserscanner is good to 5mm, so I want to learn how to get the Pictures to align to the Geofrenced Laser Scans, for this and future projects

General / Mavic 3E and Trimble X7 Alignment
« on: May 23, 2023, 02:07:15 PM »

I'm having huge issues with this workflow,

I have followed the Tutorials and every conceivable combination, but either my scan data which is georeferenced in Trimble Realwork, get moved in crazy location with my drones sparse cloud (laser scan group rest alignment[N/A]), or does not find any matches with the point cloud in the fixed position [R]

Does the E57 you using need to be a coloured point cloud to work?
I tried PTX and PTS with no improvement

My Pointcloud are greyscale intensity and I am only getting 22 match, at most between the scan data and the photos
also, some of the matches are very wrong

When I Import Laser scans there position/rotation (From Origin on import) is in the estimated area? I tried "From Unknown" on import also.

I tried Importing them in the Coordinate system of the photos and local coordinates

I tried all the above multiple times in 2.0.15, 2.0.16 and 2.0.2 with no improvement

I also tried using the layout script but this didn't seem to have any effect.

Attached Picture 1 shows the Low match count,
Attached Picture 2 shows Bad matches and also Valid matches which I would say are incorrect
Attached Picture 3 shows LASER SCAN GROUP being rotated out of position

There seem to be a lot of people here with Mavic 3E, maybe would use laser scan data also, could I DM someone for help

Can't open file; the device does not recognize the command (22)

While Building Planar Orthomosaic for front elevation of a building.

Disabling the laser scans allowed the creation to complete

General / Re: Mavik 3E Aerial + Trimble X7 Leads to "assertion" error
« on: February 21, 2023, 01:28:47 PM »
Just an update to those who wish to know, After an update to version 2.0.1

I still have a quality issue with models generated from both depthmaps and scans, if someone could direct me to a good tutorial.

Also I have a question..if the laser scans are at scale factor 1, but the coordinate system(drone flight) is scale factor 0.99982, what is the best way to consolidate that data?

General / Re: Mavik 3E Aerial + Trimble X7 Leads to "assertion" error
« on: February 08, 2023, 03:38:01 AM »
Hello Alexey Pasumansky

Many thanks for the Speedy Response. I have recreated the assertion errors.

EPSG:2157 in the coordinate system of the Laser Scan
We have a Custom Undulation grid for the Datum in Metashape, that gives very accurate transformations and is consistent with the OSI Tool for the country(Republic of Ireland).

I've tied it in standard wgs84 also, import the scan as itm and the info shows wsg84, but I still get the assertion error

I did retry again by setting each Laserscan Position as Locked Transformed, but I still get the assertion error

General / Mavik 3E Aerial + Trimble X7 Leads to "assertion" error
« on: February 07, 2023, 05:34:43 PM »
Hello All

We do Aerial Surveys and Building Scanning. We have also wanted to try and use the two datasets to create Models for clients but never had any success with the earlier versions, but this week upgraded to 2.0 which looks like it has a simpler workflow

I Imported some Mavik 3E Aerial photos and a few E57 Laser scans around the Elevation of our Building. Follow the few steps and Align the Photos, Put the scan in the group and set them to fixed as they are already georeferenced, and I get 2 different errors. If I generate a dense cloud from the photos and try making the Mesh from a limited area, by classifying an area of interest as building and trying to make a mesh from the point cloud, I get an Image out of Bounds error instantly, If I try and make the mesh out of the depth map and laser scans, it runs maybe halfway and gives the error "assertion failed at line 1123". If I remove the Laser scans from the project it works as expected.
So my Laser scans are causing the problem or Metashape cant handle my scans

The laser scan is captured with a Trimble X7 and georeferenced in Trimble Realworks and Exported as E57
Does anyone see a flaw in my workflow??
Does it matter that our scans are only intensity shaded with no colour or picture?

Can any who has and X7 and Drone tell me how they do it?

Thanks in advance

Hello again

I finally had a chance to do this, but i got stuck at the import the geoid.

I created a grid of points with both meta-shape and Gridinquest and subtracted the height values that gives a gird of differences.

put that into global-mapper gives a lovely looking picture but when i export a goetiff or .grd file fails to be accepted by metashape

Im not sure if theres something wrong with the file or the format or both??

Bug Reports / Re: metashape vs photoscan coordinates systems
« on: May 28, 2019, 10:46:23 AM »
It must be something weird in the install, some file or registry entry  that hangs around after a uninstall and messes up the coordinates

Pages: [1] 2 3