Messages

16

General / Re: Quick question on scale

« on: July 08, 2015, 06:12:06 PM »

that did it - i hadn't used the ref pane before so I missed that one [facepalm!]
that is all perfect now thanks!

17

General / Re: Quick question on scale

« on: July 08, 2015, 05:54:55 PM »

thanks for the replies.
Thanks bigben, I do have the pro version.
I'm entering the markers after the scan has been built. There is no difference to the exported mesh. Is the markers process needed to be done on the photos before any processing takes place, this is not really good for my automated workflow.
I tried adding markers to the mesh, setting  a distance and exporting - I believe this is what you recommended?
i exported the original mesh, one set at 1m and one at 100m, all were identical when loaded into my 3d program.
Is there something i'm missing here?

Thanks James, great observation! I've also seen the same results as you with the amounts of pics. I have 31 photos in my current scan which is giving me the resolution I need. I can't take any more as this will add time to processing that I can't afford so i'm looking for a specific solution in agi or i'll have to do the scaling externally.

thanks all.

18

Face and Body Scanning / Re: Help, texture issue.

« on: July 08, 2015, 12:54:19 AM »

Try loading the original baby mesh and the cleaned up one in a 3d package - do they sit on top of each other?

19

General / Quick question on scale

« on: July 07, 2015, 11:21:53 PM »

Hi,
I sometimes get a very small mesh from an agisoft scan.
Is there a way, in agisoft, to scale the mesh up.
I've already got processes to do this outside of agi but i just wanted to know if i'm missing a trick inside of agisoft itself.
Thanks for your help.

20

General / Re: performance drop from multiple titan X's

« on: June 25, 2015, 08:00:01 PM »

thanks for the reply - I've done the testing i needed to do with the cards now.
FYI the scene was 100 masked 5184x3456 Tiffs run at high on dense cloud process.
Our cards are reference cards with no overclocking.
I'd be interested in seeing all your results!
cheers

21

General / Re: performance drop from multiple titan X's

« on: June 18, 2015, 09:31:43 PM »

15/16 CPU
finished depth reconstruction in 2671.97 seconds
Device 1 performance: 202.403 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 1142.96 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1345.36 million samples/sec

zero CPU
finished depth reconstruction in 2814.99 seconds
Device 1 performance: 1246.93 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1246.93 million samples/sec

zero CPU SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 1899 seconds
Device 1 performance: 881.139 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 2 performance: 853.223 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1734.36 million samples/sec

zero CPU no SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 1666.46 seconds
Device 1 performance: 1127.63 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 2 performance: 1137.76 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 2265.39 million samples/sec

14/16 CPU SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 2043.22 seconds
Device 1 performance: 174.528 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 718.264 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 754.264 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1647.06 million samples/sec

14/16 CPU no SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 1928.05 seconds
Device 1 performance: 172.549 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 909.391 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 921.898 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 2003.84 million samples/sec

here are some more results
so the original question was, is this an expected performance drop from using multiple GPU?
I wouldn't expect to double the performance by adding a gpu - 1+1 is rarely 2 but it seems we're still getting a drop in performance when we add a gpu, roughly:
1 x 1246 million samples/sec
2 x 1150 million samples/sec
3 x 914 million samples/sec
We would obviously not use SLI or CPUs for multiple GPU with our titan X's thanks for the guidance.
We're trying to figure out an optimal setup for our needs.
thanks again for your help most useful!

22

General / Re: performance drop from multiple titan X's

« on: June 17, 2015, 05:28:40 PM »

Hi,
Here are some results of testing with three GPUs:

13/16 CPU + SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 2002.72 seconds
Device 1 performance: 172.682 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 395.05 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 388.065 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 4 performance: 421.179 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1376.97 million samples/sec

zero CPU + SLI
finished depth reconstruction in 1900.26 seconds
Device 1 performance: 443.138 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 2 performance: 478.98 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 479.976 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 1402.09 million samples/sec

13/16 CPU + SLI disabled
finished depth reconstruction in 1717.77 seconds
Device 1 performance: 147.353 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 633.477 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 629.034 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 4 performance: 666.721 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 2076.58 million samples/sec

zero CPU + SLI disabled
finished depth reconstruction in 1330.81 seconds
Device 1 performance: 899.79 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 2 performance: 914.139 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 917.935 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Total performance: 2731.86 million samples/sec

i'll repeat the tests with 2 GPUs and post results
thanks for your help!

23

General / Re: performance drop from multiple titan X's

« on: June 16, 2015, 10:59:36 PM »

Thanks dtm - I will try that, do you think it's worth taking the physical SLI cable out too?

Thanks Alexey - I'm trying your suggestions right now.

24

General / performance drop from multiple titan X's

« on: June 16, 2015, 06:18:56 PM »

Hi,
I've been benchmark testing setups with multi GPUs
I have 3 Titan X's in a PC i'm going from 1 to 2 to 3 gpus with the same scene.
i'm getting diminishing returns as i add GPUs on performance - I was wondering if i have an obvious [to you] bottleneck somewhere in my system that is causing this or is it just what happens?
All drivers are up to date and running windows 7 enterprise
SLI is enabled but i believe it's bypasses this as we're using open CL

edit:
The scene is identical in each case
It's the dense cloud process from a saved pre-processed align photos scene
the machine is restarted before each test

1 GPU:
OpenCL  active CPU cores 15/16
Device 1 performance: 202.403 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 1142.96 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)

2 GPUs
OpenCL  active CPU cores 14/16
Device 1 performance: 174.528 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 718.264 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 754.264 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)

3 GPUs
OpenCL  active CPU cores 13/16
Device 1 performance: 197.528 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 469.848 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 491.990 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)
Device 3 performance: 493.464 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX TITAN X)

Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-5960X CPU @ 3.00GHz (16 CPUs), ~3.0GHz
Memory: 32768MB RAM

any helpful advice or comments much appreciated!
thanks

25

General / Re: build a good texture

« on: May 11, 2015, 11:48:30 PM »

Hi,
From your texture it looks like you have a lot of 'shine' or specular reflections in your source images.
It's also being compounded by ISO you are using try sticking to 100.
Reducing your spec is your first priority if you don't want to just fix it in post. Look into polarization.
You will get areas in the texture that will be more blurry compared to others even if you have perfect pictures.
What i usually do is generate a large image and reduce down.
hope this helps

26

Feature Requests / Re: Photoscan forgets batch settings.

« on: January 16, 2015, 11:25:20 PM »

+1 on this, it would be very useful

27

Feature Requests / Batch Processing Refinement

« on: January 14, 2015, 06:42:12 PM »

Without python API support for networking, would you be able to make the batch processing a bit more flexible?
I like the features you have added in the latest version but a few more features which would be very useful are:
-saving the batch [huge!]
-or at least remembering your last selections when opening another  version of agi not just going back to the standard default
-load photos from a folder
-auto save using the path from the photos
-having the defaults reflect whats going on in the main ui [eg in the ui i have "use masks" in align photos]
-reset region feature when optimizing alignment

Thanks

28

Feature Requests / Re: Save Job in Batch Processing

« on: January 14, 2015, 06:08:01 PM »

+1 this would be a great as I can't use python scripts with the excellent network processing feature.

29

Face and Body Scanning / Re: Building a 39 camera full body rig

« on: September 18, 2014, 04:39:54 PM »

Is it possible to get decent results without masking? We have no luck so far.. usually PS mixes up the back and the front end of an object and creates a very "interesting" object..

[/quote]

The best results are masking 100% of the time, you won't get any color bleed when you come to create your texture. If you use photoshop to mask, you should be able to to do each image manually in about 30secs using good techniques for a simple head [if this works practically for the volume of photos you're going to take obv ]. Auto masking using a background is ok but not great: think of the magic wand in photoshop the results are about the same. If you have a different colored background it improves things but then you'll get that color reflected into your subject which you may not want. Hope this helps.