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 - Brit

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
General / Re: mesh appeared to "explode"
« on: July 09, 2021, 03:36:49 AM »
>"Which Metashape version do you use and which mesh generation settings have been selected in this project?

It's 1.7.1. I'm updating now.

>Also please specify, if the alignment results are correct, or whether you see that some cameras are aligned incorrectly or even the alignment is split into several poorly connected >components."

I'm not quite sure what this means. How do I know if they are correct?

Do I optimize cameras?

General / mesh appeared to "explode"
« on: July 09, 2021, 02:06:10 AM »
For some reason my seemingly normal dese cloud of a high Utah ridge scan seemed to "explode" with hundreds of small spheres floating around the ridge, which was ill defined when the bits were removed. Any ideas?

General / Re: Where did the camera rectangles go?
« on: March 19, 2021, 01:45:25 AM »

General / Where did the camera rectangles go?
« on: March 17, 2021, 01:00:56 AM »
Hello, for some reasons I'm missing those little rectangles that show the placement of the cameras after the alignment phase. Any suggestions?

Bug Reports / Re: freezes at 21% when "parameterizing texture atlas.."
« on: October 23, 2020, 03:34:10 AM »
Yes! I upgraded and it worked. Thanks!

Bug Reports / Re: freezes at 21% when "parameterizing texture atlas.."
« on: October 22, 2020, 10:58:24 PM »
It had about 140 images to process. Large but I've done larger without a problem. I tried another one from scratch. this time adding another 40 image. It went through the high dense cloud and mesh without a hitch. This time it made it to 69% when making a texture map, and stopped for 11 hours (over night). It looked like it did not run out of ram. I ticked the "Use CPU when performing GPU accelerating processing" this time around.

Bug Reports / freezes at 21% when "parameterizing texture atlas.."
« on: October 22, 2020, 07:21:08 AM »
I have a model in Metashape standard that freezes at 21% when "parameterizing texture atlas.." after creating the mesh and then creating a texture. I have re tried a few times 0- and waited hours each time.  This has never happened before now. Any suggestions? 

General / Re: The most effective way to make a scan from many photos?
« on: July 02, 2019, 07:49:09 PM »

Since the professional version is way beyond my budget, I'll stick to waiting another 6 hours for the dense cloud complete,processing. I can do the processing  when I plan be away from my laptop for the 30 hours needed to complete it.

However I had thought that dividing the processing into "chunks" might work in allowing to separate the job into two.

Although I have used this software fairly successfully for about 6 years, I never really understood what a "chunk" is or how to use it. I read the instructions and searched for videos but I haven't yet for a definition of the word, "chunk" ...or how to use them...and if they can be used to simply divide the project into two parts. Do they need to be in 2 halves, by somehow gathering all photos from one half and then the other?

General / Re: The most effective way to make a scan from many photos?
« on: June 29, 2019, 08:54:24 PM »
Really. No one knows??

General / The most effective way to make a scan from many photos?
« on: June 28, 2019, 03:27:11 PM »
 I just returned from a trip where I let my laptop render for one and a half days. Photoscan said upon returning that I needed another 9 hours more to complete the scan. However I didn't have nine hours since I I needed to catch a train within 3 hours.

This scan was a record for me with 380 photographs. What is the most efficient way of completing such a scan on different multiple  overnight sessions? Can I divide it into chunks? If so, is there a good video link to how to achieve this? I have ot found any so far that are easy to understand. Any suggestions? Thank you in advance.

General / Re: How high an overlap percentage is too much?
« on: January 20, 2019, 07:29:04 AM »
The medium cloud was about far faster (in a couple hours), but the resolution was ... well, medium - not great quality. The high res cloud was much better but it took about 20 hours to calculate. (they were rendered in 3Ds Max using the scan-line and no shadows) I also tried one masking the clouds. It calculated a bit faster but was not much of an improvement. I'm sticking to the high res. Making the area smaller did speed it all up dramatically (the first calculation crashed while going onto the second day of calculating). Thanks for the suggestions!

General / Re: How high an overlap percentage is too much?
« on: January 15, 2019, 11:26:18 PM »
Thanks for the suggestions. I just went into the room where the laptop lives and saw that Photoscan had crashed and Windows had re-booted the computer this morning - 2 days into the calculations for the dense cloud.  I am trying again. I made the regions slightly smaller (though I want some neighbouring hills in the final mesh). And I changed the dense cloud setting to “medium”, but I kept the next stage, the mesh settings, to include the depth map quality at "high" and the mesh at 4 million (for now…it saves each step in the batch processing). The Task Manager showed that it never got above 30 RAM the first time around (when I was checking it every few hours).

General / How high an overlap percentage is too much?
« on: January 15, 2019, 02:23:40 AM »
How high an overlap percentage is too much?

I recently used Drone Harmony to scan in a nearby hill with a tree on it's peak (a phenomenon called pedestal erosion). I decided to redo the following day. One calculates the overlap when programming a mission, though guessing the correct distance from the subject, and gimbal angle can be challenging.

 However when I return the google map under the "mission" was missing since I was out of cell phone range, so I used DJO Go's tack orbit, which allows gimbal adjustment and distance on the fly.  I clicked away on the photos as fast as I could as it spun around the hill (RAW images on a Mavic 2).

I may have taken too many photos with too much overlap. It is now the second day of processing these images on Photoscan on my new lap top (with pretty close to the latest and greatest CPU, GPU ...and with 32 gigs of RAM). It says I have another day to go for the dense cloud calculation! I have the setting on "high".

Would it work about as well (but calculate much faster) with a setting on "medium"...or should I remove ever other image in the orbits to speed things up on future orbital scans. Perhaps being too lazy to mask out the sky and clouds (along with the moving cloud shadows) also screwed things up (though we'll see how it turns out...maybe tomorrow)? 

What should the overlap percentage for obits be?

General / Re: My photos never seem to calibrate (always NC) lately
« on: January 15, 2018, 09:27:20 AM »
I see my mistake now! When I converted the RAW images on my laptop into Tiff images, I lost my EXIF Data that contained the calibration information. I now fixed it in Photoshop, so that the RAW converter saves all metadata when converting from RAW to Tiff. The correct focal length at its widest (24mm) is 8.8 and the pixel size is (as above): .00241.

General / Re: My photos never seem to calibrate (always NC) lately
« on: December 11, 2017, 03:08:57 AM »
"Approximate Pixel Pitch: 2.41 microns or 0.00241 mm"

Photoscan calculated one set - calibrated at the pixel size 0.00157777, with the focal length at 0.00157777 at 4.73 for the Sony RX100 IV on its default wide angle setting

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5