121
General / Re: can one send a Private Message on this forum ?
« on: July 11, 2019, 01:50:07 PM »
Cheers Alexei, I see that now, also if click on a users name send PM appears.
Steve
Steve
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.
122
General / can one send a Private Message on this forum ?
« on: July 11, 2019, 12:10:20 AM »
Hi,
forums normally have means of sending a member a PM, and sometimes they get a notification of that fact of being sent a PM in their email, I cant see any means of creating a PM here..
Cheers
Steve
forums normally have means of sending a member a PM, and sometimes they get a notification of that fact of being sent a PM in their email, I cant see any means of creating a PM here..
Cheers
Steve
123
General / catch 22 need masks to align photos but initial align fails
« on: July 11, 2019, 12:02:33 AM »
Hi.
metashape 1.5.3
fundamental catch 22.
1) align photos, 3 chunks because object 3 positions relative to background, get an overall 43% failure rate.
2) it was then to be dense point cloud then mesh then edit background out then mask from model then merge chunks then realign photos,
will all that work so as to get mask from model with almost half failed ? model wont be good., mask wont be good.
catch 22 you need mask from model to then re-align well yet unable to get initial photos to align without masks !
I see that David Cockey uses this method, any help David or anyone appreciated.
update ....went ahead and edited out background, import mask from model, 21 masks appear from 54 photos, of those they are all chunk 1, chunks 2 (18 pics) and 3 (8pics) none.
Steve
metashape 1.5.3
fundamental catch 22.
1) align photos, 3 chunks because object 3 positions relative to background, get an overall 43% failure rate.
2) it was then to be dense point cloud then mesh then edit background out then mask from model then merge chunks then realign photos,
will all that work so as to get mask from model with almost half failed ? model wont be good., mask wont be good.
catch 22 you need mask from model to then re-align well yet unable to get initial photos to align without masks !
I see that David Cockey uses this method, any help David or anyone appreciated.
update ....went ahead and edited out background, import mask from model, 21 masks appear from 54 photos, of those they are all chunk 1, chunks 2 (18 pics) and 3 (8pics) none.
Steve
124
Feature Requests / option to distribute tool icons for fast working along toolbar.
« on: July 08, 2019, 05:09:49 PM »
Hi,
Accessing tools by having to slow down and click on a little black triangle then select from a tiny icon when switching between region modifying tools and also object modifying tools makes for very slow working, all that empty grey bar to place them in as well making the picky tedious drop down lists unecessary. . Can we have an option to distribute them along the bar instead for faster working or just in a version update lay them out there anyway, no one will mind I would think seeing the tools all to hand and being faster to access anyway. Also maybe different colour for the object tools than for the region tools as they can be a bit similar.
Steve
Accessing tools by having to slow down and click on a little black triangle then select from a tiny icon when switching between region modifying tools and also object modifying tools makes for very slow working, all that empty grey bar to place them in as well making the picky tedious drop down lists unecessary. . Can we have an option to distribute them along the bar instead for faster working or just in a version update lay them out there anyway, no one will mind I would think seeing the tools all to hand and being faster to access anyway. Also maybe different colour for the object tools than for the region tools as they can be a bit similar.
Steve
125
General / Re: Duplicate chunk in Pscan 1.4.5 and see depth maps yet dont exist until metashape
« on: July 08, 2019, 05:01:34 PM »
aha, so depth maps not a new innovation in metashape then. also interesting that using high when building dense point cloud sees the option to reuse depth maps greyed out in mesh stage, . we must use a lower setting.
Steve
Steve
126
General / Re: Agisoft filling in bolt and rivet holes I need to see.
« on: July 08, 2019, 04:58:01 PM »
Hi,
would do but that sees exif data with contact details and so on included which I dont put out on internet.
I could strip it out but then I have to add it all back in again else pshop wont save it as such.
Steve
would do but that sees exif data with contact details and so on included which I dont put out on internet.
I could strip it out but then I have to add it all back in again else pshop wont save it as such.
Steve
127
General / Re: localised decimation option would be FANTASTIC ?
« on: July 07, 2019, 12:11:09 AM »Quote
The decimation tool is already adaptive and is trying to maintain higher number of polygons to the details compared to the plain surfaces that would be reduced to the low number of polygons.see attached. not v good.
will have to use meshlab or similar to try and reduce mesh yet preserve detail areas.
Quote
But I've got your idea regarding the decimation of the selected area only.good, hope to see it soon
Quote
As a workaround I could suggest to smooth the certain selected areas with high number of steps (strength parameter) and then decimate the model.Where do I find that procedure ? aha smooth mesh dialog box, check box to apply to selected faces, I will explore.
Cheers,
Steve
128
Feature Requests / scale rotate move icons for region and object so easily selected in photoscan
« on: July 06, 2019, 10:57:55 PM »
Hi,
Where is the option in Metashape and also photoscan 1.4.5 to lay out tools side by side for working like I am so used to in photoscan 1.2.6 ?
since using Metashape and Photoscan 1.4.5 I am finding my speed of navigating and working seriously impeded by having to carefully select a little black arrow each time I want a different tool, I go scale rotate move scale region then rotate object move object and so on very quickly and now I cannot, how do we get the separate tools to be separate again, there is all this vast empty grey bar for them to all be easily picked from as they were in 1.2.6 and they are now in drop down lists requiring fiddly selection of a black arrow then selecting the tool, its double the selection time with slowing down on hitting the black arrow ,and its taking ages, I could work so fast but not now. Its as if someone thought isn't that slick to have them in little drop downs but its impractical ! Messing about waiting for processes takes up our life but please can we gain time and have the easy access tools back.
I have looked in preferences for an option to distribute them on toolbar but found nothing.
I dont want to revert to photoscan just for the decent tool layout.
Steve
Where is the option in Metashape and also photoscan 1.4.5 to lay out tools side by side for working like I am so used to in photoscan 1.2.6 ?
since using Metashape and Photoscan 1.4.5 I am finding my speed of navigating and working seriously impeded by having to carefully select a little black arrow each time I want a different tool, I go scale rotate move scale region then rotate object move object and so on very quickly and now I cannot, how do we get the separate tools to be separate again, there is all this vast empty grey bar for them to all be easily picked from as they were in 1.2.6 and they are now in drop down lists requiring fiddly selection of a black arrow then selecting the tool, its double the selection time with slowing down on hitting the black arrow ,and its taking ages, I could work so fast but not now. Its as if someone thought isn't that slick to have them in little drop downs but its impractical ! Messing about waiting for processes takes up our life but please can we gain time and have the easy access tools back.
I have looked in preferences for an option to distribute them on toolbar but found nothing.
I dont want to revert to photoscan just for the decent tool layout.
Steve
129
General / Agisoft filling in bolt and rivet holes I need to see.
« on: July 06, 2019, 10:25:17 PM »
Hi,
I have holes as part of the engineering item yet they are being filled in by Agisoft it seems as I have top quality photos.
Brake shoe Alexei !
I am sure I saw an option somewhere for fill holes, I dont need it, I need to see bolt holes and rivet holes.
I am now looking at the workflow steps in metashape as I have managed to get the file recreated as per your fix you carried out in metashape. Thank you.
I can't see any hole options anywhere.
I need to resolve this else every project will be useless if these holes get filled in.
Steve
I have holes as part of the engineering item yet they are being filled in by Agisoft it seems as I have top quality photos.
Brake shoe Alexei !
I am sure I saw an option somewhere for fill holes, I dont need it, I need to see bolt holes and rivet holes.
I am now looking at the workflow steps in metashape as I have managed to get the file recreated as per your fix you carried out in metashape. Thank you.
I can't see any hole options anywhere.
I need to resolve this else every project will be useless if these holes get filled in.
Steve
130
General / Re: ultra high mesh source ultra high densepointcloud 45mins elapsed build 0%
« on: July 06, 2019, 05:29:58 PM »
Hi,
I have GPU GTX970 cuda ticked and CPU tcked in preferences which according to the pdf manual is correct if using single GPU.
PC is 32Gb ddr vengeance pro Intel Core i7 4790 3.6GHz win 7 64bit pro.
Following the need to keep my Ultra high quality , as a test to see what happens with ultra high in mesh after ultra high in Dense point cloud,
2hr 20 mins of 'accumulating dense cloud' then phase 2, and after 45mins of it saying building model 0% it said 48 days remaining, I dont think 48 days is good for anyone, not on a single small wheel and axle. clearly something got stuck at the building model phase.
I hit cancel as clearly there was something wrong with choosing ultra high mesh after ultra high dpc. (in photoscane 1.4.5) or was it ticking and using strict volumetric that caused the problem ?
Trouble is whilst PC is spending hrs processing as such I cant use it on anything else as one cannot minimise agisoft, also its using all resources so everything else sees a jerk y mouse, CAD and photoshop would be impossible.
I will try again, this time with Metashape where , as you say, retaining ultra high depth map needs ultra high mesh setting, to see if Metashape also has the same issue.
Steve
Quote
Only way to re-use the available depth maps is to select the same quality option and check on "reuse depth" option (in Build Mesh or Build Dense Cloud dialog).
I have GPU GTX970 cuda ticked and CPU tcked in preferences which according to the pdf manual is correct if using single GPU.
PC is 32Gb ddr vengeance pro Intel Core i7 4790 3.6GHz win 7 64bit pro.
Following the need to keep my Ultra high quality , as a test to see what happens with ultra high in mesh after ultra high in Dense point cloud,
2hr 20 mins of 'accumulating dense cloud' then phase 2, and after 45mins of it saying building model 0% it said 48 days remaining, I dont think 48 days is good for anyone, not on a single small wheel and axle. clearly something got stuck at the building model phase.
I hit cancel as clearly there was something wrong with choosing ultra high mesh after ultra high dpc. (in photoscane 1.4.5) or was it ticking and using strict volumetric that caused the problem ?
Trouble is whilst PC is spending hrs processing as such I cant use it on anything else as one cannot minimise agisoft, also its using all resources so everything else sees a jerk y mouse, CAD and photoshop would be impossible.
I will try again, this time with Metashape where , as you say, retaining ultra high depth map needs ultra high mesh setting, to see if Metashape also has the same issue.
Steve
131
General / Re: speed of depth map I thought it was faster than point cloud
« on: July 06, 2019, 03:02:46 AM »
Hi,
1 and 2...yes understand that as , if depth map uses arbitray 3D then thats why its denied as a choice, its greyed out.
when you had said
As such, I need to know though , if Depth map is made with UltraHigh densePointCloud, so we have UltraHigh quality depth maps, does choosing High in mesh mode reduce the depth maps from ultra high to high lessening their quality ?
should we also then use ultra high in mesh mode to retain the quality of the ultrahigh depth maps created in densePointCloud stage ?
I am running ultra high mesh on ultrahigh densepointcloud in photoscan and big problems with time its taking ,see posted thread.
https://www.agisoft.com/forum/index.php?topic=11090.0
Steve
1 and 2...yes understand that as , if depth map uses arbitray 3D then thats why its denied as a choice, its greyed out.
when you had said
Quote
2) Build Mesh (only if both Arbitrary surface type and Depth Maps source options are selected),it was the fact that one cannot select depth map AND arbitrary3D. it should be depth map (arbitray greyed out) OR densepoint&arbitrary 3D.
Quote
"Quality" parameter in Build Dense Cloud and in Build Mesh (when Depth Maps source is selected) has SAME meaning - it is the quality of the depth maps
As such, I need to know though , if Depth map is made with UltraHigh densePointCloud, so we have UltraHigh quality depth maps, does choosing High in mesh mode reduce the depth maps from ultra high to high lessening their quality ?
should we also then use ultra high in mesh mode to retain the quality of the ultrahigh depth maps created in densePointCloud stage ?
I am running ultra high mesh on ultrahigh densepointcloud in photoscan and big problems with time its taking ,see posted thread.
https://www.agisoft.com/forum/index.php?topic=11090.0
Steve
132
General / ultra high mesh source ultra high densepointcloud 45mins elapsed build 0%
« on: July 06, 2019, 02:51:39 AM »
Hi,
Photoscan 1.4.5
small trolley wheel and axle.
I have created dense point cloud using ultra high aggressive, took 6.5hrs
now to run Mesh ultrahigh to see if I can get better detail than with mesh high, use strict volumetric masks.
started it at 21:51 accumulating dense cloud until 00:11, thats 2hr 20mins on that phase of the operation, but now...
now building model it says and after 45mins still 0% done
and now its saying 48 days left !!!!!
aborted it .
saved it 2.4Gb strewth !!!
WHAT IS WRONG
?
Steve
Photoscan 1.4.5
small trolley wheel and axle.
I have created dense point cloud using ultra high aggressive, took 6.5hrs
now to run Mesh ultrahigh to see if I can get better detail than with mesh high, use strict volumetric masks.
started it at 21:51 accumulating dense cloud until 00:11, thats 2hr 20mins on that phase of the operation, but now...
now building model it says and after 45mins still 0% done
and now its saying 48 days left !!!!!
aborted it .
saved it 2.4Gb strewth !!!
WHAT IS WRONG
?Steve
133
General / Re: should decimation not be by percent rather than a typed in number ?
« on: July 06, 2019, 12:09:48 AM »
Hi,
Further to awaiting advice on decimation, which basically messes up a formerly good mesh for CAD use, all the detail I was enjoying has been nuked, I dont need thousands of mesh on some parts of model (tyre surface) but need detail on screw threads on bolts and details on side wall of tyre, is there a way of reducing mesh on less important areas ?
This would be a FANTASTIC option as why do we have to wreck a model as it contains far to many faces for most of it and makes moving the model around like wading through molasses ?
Steve
Further to awaiting advice on decimation, which basically messes up a formerly good mesh for CAD use, all the detail I was enjoying has been nuked, I dont need thousands of mesh on some parts of model (tyre surface) but need detail on screw threads on bolts and details on side wall of tyre, is there a way of reducing mesh on less important areas ?
This would be a FANTASTIC option as why do we have to wreck a model as it contains far to many faces for most of it and makes moving the model around like wading through molasses ?
Steve
134
General / Duplicate chunk in Pscan 1.4.5 and see depth maps yet dont exist until metashape
« on: July 05, 2019, 11:48:21 PM »
Hi,
suprised to see when duplicating a chunk, a greyed out option to include depth map, (also key points greyed out) and ticked are dense points and model, as they (depth maps) dont exist until metashape why are they there ?
Steve
suprised to see when duplicating a chunk, a greyed out option to include depth map, (also key points greyed out) and ticked are dense points and model, as they (depth maps) dont exist until metashape why are they there ?
Steve
135
General / Re: Visibility-consisten mesh generation vs the "new" depth maps approach
« on: July 05, 2019, 11:37:32 PM »
Hi,
I have just eventually got Metashape to run, and downloaded 1.5.3 just in case any problems were fixed, it was a combination of Agisoft AND kaspersky freezing up PC.
However I had got far better results with photoscan 1.2.6 than 1.4.5 and a mess with Metashape 1.5.2 on the same set of pics. Agisoft support trying to solve why the images taxed and failed Metashape yet 1.2.6 had no problem.
I see in the website promo that using depth maps in metashape which is not available in 1.4.5 will speed up process 175images 19hrs to 9hrs.
I am after great finesse, reading this thread has the issue the thread is about been resolved in 1.5.3 ?
Would I be better off with Photoscan 1.4.5 and densepoint clouds ?
I have turned on this 'visibility consistent feature' and see one has to tick it in mesh options>advanced. Hope it makes a difference. so where has this gone to in Metashape then ?
Steve
I have just eventually got Metashape to run, and downloaded 1.5.3 just in case any problems were fixed, it was a combination of Agisoft AND kaspersky freezing up PC.
However I had got far better results with photoscan 1.2.6 than 1.4.5 and a mess with Metashape 1.5.2 on the same set of pics. Agisoft support trying to solve why the images taxed and failed Metashape yet 1.2.6 had no problem.
I see in the website promo that using depth maps in metashape which is not available in 1.4.5 will speed up process 175images 19hrs to 9hrs.
I am after great finesse, reading this thread has the issue the thread is about been resolved in 1.5.3 ?
Would I be better off with Photoscan 1.4.5 and densepoint clouds ?
I have turned on this 'visibility consistent feature' and see one has to tick it in mesh options>advanced. Hope it makes a difference. so where has this gone to in Metashape then ?
Steve
