Messages

31

General / Best practice tiny objects

« on: May 31, 2019, 12:17:41 PM »

I have made some attempts at doing tiny objects but I am struggling to obtain proper overlap. I am using a Syrp mini turntable rig with synchronised shutter and a NIkon D610 60mm macro for shooting.

My example is a 1200-year old brooch, aprox 45x27x12 mm dimensions, and ~1mm wall thickness. I have to be extremely cautious handling it and cannot use any adhering materials such as putty directly on it to stay in optimal positions. I did several rounds at different angles, but issues with DOF and (I think) the wall thickness is preventing the different sets from aligning.

My question is; have you done any small object like this - and if so; what is your methodology?

32

Feature Requests / shortcut rename chunk

« on: November 23, 2018, 12:33:00 PM »

Could we have custimizable actions for chunk (right click chunk -> rename etc.)?

33

Bug Reports / Re: SLPK invert Z

« on: October 29, 2018, 01:32:06 PM »

Z-axis is correct in PS view, the model is in ETRS89 / UTM zone 33N EPSG: 25833

34

Bug Reports / SLPK invert Z

« on: October 29, 2018, 12:24:49 PM »

I did an slpk export of a tiled model and tried import to arcgis pro, but I am getting negative Z-values close to the inverse of actual Z. The model looks fine and there is no issue with display, other than an inverse of Z.

35

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.5.0 pre-release

« on: October 11, 2018, 08:57:33 AM »

Tried another run on the cloud with an unprocessed project, but it returned the attatched error message.

36

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.5.0 pre-release

« on: October 10, 2018, 09:48:36 AM »

I have tested the cloud computing and there seems to be some bug in the pipeline. Not sure if it has finished processing yet, because it is less than a day since I started processing.

37

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.5.0 pre-release

« on: October 09, 2018, 02:04:46 PM »

I signed up for an account and have started processing but I cannot find any status on the project, other than that it is processing. At https://account.agisoft.com nothing happens when pressing General, Projects or Payments, I can only change my name and password.

38

General / Inner boundary model clipping

« on: September 21, 2018, 03:37:53 PM »

I see in the changelog for 1.4.3 build 6529* that it says "Added boundary clipping for model export.". I only get this to work as outer boundary clipping. Is it only possible to have an outer boundary, or is it a bug that makes inner boundary not work? If I use only Inner boundary, it exports the model as if it is outer boundary.

*I am running 1.4.4 (6848)

39

General / Re: ArcGIS integration

« on: September 13, 2018, 10:16:04 AM »

I tried the SLPK in ArcGIS Pro and all I got was a flat imagae with no apparent height. Tried the same in ArcGIS Online and I got it working, but the functionalities in Online isn't the best, so it is har for me to inspect properly. Looks promising though, and I will definitely test more. Could you send me link for 1.4.4 to see if it solves the issues with ArcGIS Pro?

40

General / Re: ArcGIS integration

« on: September 12, 2018, 02:53:31 PM »

As far as I can see from ArcGIS Pro documentation, the only supported format with a defined coordinate system is GeoVRML. But I would perhaps suggest contacting ESRI directly to see if there is a better way of integrating services better, like what has been done with 4Dmapper and Sketchup. ESRI is heavy on cloud-services and could probably have some sort of integration directly in PS.

41

General / ArcGIS integration

« on: September 12, 2018, 12:15:38 PM »

There is still no integration between PS and ArcGIS as far as I can see. I have tried asking about this before but haven't goten any clear answer regarding whether or not it is being developed or not. So in the mean time I was hoping that somebody had done some groundbreaking work on this, other than converting collada-models in ArcScene from lokal to UTM using model swap technique. Anyone working with ArcGIS Pro that have a sollution? Is there any way of converting vrml to GeoVRML for instance?

42

General / Ortofoto from bottom of trench

« on: September 11, 2018, 02:49:27 PM »

So I am trying to find a best practice workflow for generating ortophotos from trenches. I am only interested in the very bottom of the trench, but I end up with getting "bleeding" from the top of the trench. It probably has to do with the fact that the images are taken slightly oblique  in order to get the whole trench bottom. I have tried manually editing the seamlines in order to avoid this, but it is a very tedious and time consuming task.
The image I have attached shows the orto produced with full geometry produced, ie. the entire trench is meshed, then orto produced on mesh. Same result happens if I use dense cloud or if I trim the mesh/point cloud so that only the bottom is left. I have also tried masking everything but the bottom, but nothing seems to work.

Any ideas??

PS: Can we please have a larger file size than 512kB on attachments? Can't even do a screenshot without exceeding the limit...

43

General / Best practice - fine detail on low poly output

« on: June 22, 2018, 02:56:45 PM »

I am looking for a good workflow on mesh decimation without loosing fine details.

My subjects for this workflow are rock art sites. They are typical large areas, from 2x1 meters, up to 50x5 meters. Some of theses sites have carvings covering a large  percent of the surface, with typical carving depth of between 1-5 mm. If i process 200+ (24mpx) images on ultra high, I will end up killing my hardware. Even if I could manage to process it, it would take a lot of processing hours, and the end result would be useless because there are no way I could disseminate a 300M poly model to any user, let alone publish it on any standard platform. So what I need is a good workflow that A) reduces time spent modelling "un-interesting areas" at more than necessary quality whilst going ultra on points of interest, i.e carvings, and B) decimate mesh without loosing fine details.

I know this is a lot to ask, if at all possible, but I am hoping for some ideas that might solve some of my challenges.

44

Feature Requests / Re: Size of Marker ID text

« on: June 12, 2018, 01:55:58 PM »

Yoann,

I am fully aware of the functionality of the markers as they are today, but as I tried to explain, what I want is an automated feature that scales the numbers of markers to a set page-size based on marker size. That way I could say "print 5 mm markers on a4" and get x number of markers per page, instead of the limits of 1-6 per page as is today.

45

Feature Requests / Print markers

« on: May 09, 2018, 12:23:31 PM »

I use the print marker function from time to time and I am quite happy with it, with the exception of a couple of things. It would be nice if the size of the number next to the fiducial could be made large enough (without having to do it manually post-export) so that it can be read at a longer distance. it would also be nice to have the software automatically distribute a best-fit number of markers based on size per page. Printing out a sheet of six markers with 1 mm center point wastes a lot of material, and if I want huge markers they would be on top of each other without warning (see attachment)