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 - Andrew

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
General / Re: settings of Photoscan pro1.0.0
« on: March 10, 2014, 05:24:56 PM »
Thank you for the updated change log Alexey!

As for the mesh quality issue, I can share my project for debugging, but its 0,7GB in size..
Perhaps your scene is a bit more upload-friendly, Morgan?


General / Re: settings of Photoscan pro1.0.0
« on: March 10, 2014, 02:35:39 PM »
Just yesterday I noticed the same thing when rebuilding old project from before Dense Point Cloud was introduced.

Can we kindly ask for Change Log updates so that we can make informed decisions whether to update? I usually don't risk updating tools while in mid-production, unless I know the updates address specific issues affecting my production.


No, it doesn't, the newly introduced 1200D should. But let's wait for reviews to confirm that and for introductory prices to fall to where they need to be (current 1100D price point) :)

Face and Body Scanning / Re: Studio Flash suggestions...
« on: February 25, 2014, 12:33:46 AM »
If you can bounce your light off walls, floor and ceiling, that's definitely ideal and most cost-effective :) If not (might be especially tricky outdoors  ;)), I personally get decent enough results with regular cheap diffusor umbrellas.


Face and Body Scanning / Re: Studio Flash suggestions...
« on: February 24, 2014, 05:58:41 PM »
Quantuum is a Polish brand, are they even distributed at all outside of Poland?

One brand that should definitely be on your shortlist is Paul C. Buff with their excellent Einstein line or the more affordable Alien Bees. They also produce dedicated portable power source bricks.


There seems to be some confusion about suggested price of new product entering market, vs street price after the dust settles :)

Everywhere I have ever looked, Canon 1100D was significantly cheaper than Canon 600D, and I am pretty sure (well, hoping) that won't change with Canon 1100D replacement.

Agreed on the milking though, If my count is right, this is Canon's fifth camera in last three years, using same exact sensor.

Heads up, Canon just announced upgrade to their entry level DSLR - Rebel T5/1200D model now sports 18mp sensor, presumably the same that we know and love from 600D/6500D/700D :)

Multicam rigs just got significantly cheaper?

Feature Requests / Re: Region Orientation, no fine control..
« on: February 09, 2014, 11:50:29 AM »
I second Lee's feedback about region rotation, it would be nice to have more control there!

As for the method of using coded targets to align scene, kudos to you James!

Perhaps Agisoft can implement similiar workflow, doing the math automatically? Perhaps it could be as simple as defining that first two markers represent X axis and line from third marker, perpendicular to the line connecting first two, is our y axis?

Maybe we could even place markers at even distance from the scene center (around scanned subject) And have photoscan treat midpoint between markers as the 0, 0, 0 origin?

Lastly, I really wish that manual markers, rulers and coded targets features would trickle down to Standard Edition, leaving all of the advanced ground control, ortophoto and other DEM-related features, plus 4D, to differentiate Proffesional Edition...

Face and Body Scanning / Re: Advantages of using full frame?
« on: February 09, 2014, 11:28:27 AM »
Very interesting read, thanks for the link David!

What I always wondered but never had the time to investigate, is whether one really needs to keep entire face in sharp focus to get awesome face scans? Perhaps sticking to pin-sharp f8 and masking out OOF areas (that will get their sharp photo coverage from other cameras) would produce better quality scans? My gut feeling is that its not worth the hassle, maybe only for the most pale/smooth skins out there :)

Face and Body Scanning / Re: Advantages of using full frame?
« on: February 09, 2014, 12:14:10 AM »
Keep in mind that shallower DOF on full frame requires higher f-stop, most likely higher than f13, at which point (well, from f11 onwards) light diffraction significantly reduces image sharpness. This effectively nullifies IQ advantage over crop cameras.


Bug Reports / Re: Estimate Image Quality - inconsistent results
« on: January 26, 2014, 12:14:41 PM »
Alexey, I only now noticed your explanation of Est. Image Quality referring to area of highest quality. This makes sense to help weed out photos with camera shake, but I think it would also make sense to have average IQ reported for entire photo, BUT, taking mask into consideration. A lot of times DOF issues are unavoidable and I end up taking a lot of photos, masking out different areas of them to only leave sharp areas. It would be great if Est. IQ feature could help determine whether enough out of focus pixels have been masked out.


General / Re: Rough surface problem...
« on: January 20, 2014, 01:59:33 PM »
Make sure you If you are sure your cameras are well focused and retrieve nice sharp detail of subjects face (sharp spots, blemishes even skin pores). Capture must be fast enough to avoid any subject movement.
If  you are still getting noisy mesh, most likely your cameras are positioned too far apart from each other. Higher ISO definitely increases noise in mesh but ISO 200 should not be that bad.

General / Re: Masking and texture overspill
« on: January 20, 2014, 12:17:16 PM »
This is something I have been experiencing a lot as well - texturing algorithm seems to be taking shortcuts with projection, ignoring some of occlusion. You may have a flat surface with a pole in front of it, and while dense point cloud will represent surface behind a pole perfectly (thanks to photos taken at angles), texture algorithm will often project that pole onto a wall, using the front camera instead of those at angles that dense cloud algorithm used.

Agisoft, any suggestions? Perhaps some future work is planned to improve texture projection in these circumstances?


General / Re: CPU and GPU benchmarks
« on: January 11, 2014, 12:56:30 PM »

I am really glad you included Photoscan in benchmarks on Anandtech! This is one of few pieces of software that can stress hardware in a number of interesting ways. And PS is getting more and more popular by the minute! :)
I am particularly interested in how memory speeds improve PS performance - it seems to be quite the bottleneck in some stages.
I am also curious to know if/whether full utilization of CPU and two GPUs at the same time causes enough thermal issues to result in throttling. I saw that Anand in his review of new Mac Pro, in order to fully saturate the hardware, had to run two programs (Furmark and Prime, and it DID cause slowdown), well now Photoscan alone could do the trick (Build Dense Point Cloud step). I can't wait to see whether Mac Pro's cooling solution is sufficient for Photoscan. And lastly, it would be great to see how does dual D700 compare in OpenCL performance to dual 7970s or 290s on regular PC builds.

Thanks Ian!

General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.0.0 pre-release
« on: December 29, 2013, 08:37:28 PM »
I'm sure Agisoft folks are doing their best to resolve the issue, and in the mean time, we can roll back to the latest build before the new algorithms were introduced. If I am not mistaken, it is build 1774, correct?.

I have a question though: I already have a lot of projects done on latest builds, with mesh artifacts similar to those everyone else is getting. After rolling back to older build, do I just have to rebuild mesh to get good old clean geometry results? Or do I have to rebuild dense point cloud on that build as well?


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6