Forum

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 - toxicmag

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
16
Dear members,

it seems to me that all of my latest generations of Orthomosaics have more obvoius strips&spots from sun-shadow changes.
Usually i optimize the data with regard to brightness/shadows before starting the Metashape process. But data size is getting bigger and bigger and i would like to skip this step.

Do you experience the same? Did the blending process somehow change?

Thansk a lot and greetings
Alex

17
Dear members,

do you also experience the panel detection of Micasense cameras failing in NIR-channel?
Latest Metashape (1.5.4) is used, but this issue was also seen in 1.5.3.  (see attachments).

Taking the calibration photos from shorter distances shows the same effect.

Usually i then start toggling through the bands and do manual masking, but the general questions are:

1) Is the NIR channel being used in the calibration at all?
2) Will manual masking solve the issue properly?

Thanks for your replies.

Alex

18
Worked!  ;)
Seems to be sold with the new release.

Thx

Alex

Hello Alex,

I have sent a pre-release version of 1.5.4 to you via PM, please check if there is still a difference between default orthomosaic resolution for GUI and Batch process run.

As for the 4GB limit for TIFF - it is the TIFF format limitation. To overcome it you should either use BigTIFF format  or enable Split in Blocks feature on export.

19
Feature Requests / Re: Selected Point Statistics
« on: August 07, 2019, 06:24:50 PM »
+1

20
Bug Reports / Re: Altum GSD issues
« on: August 06, 2019, 01:23:21 PM »
Hi Christina,

we have a correct correlation between flight altitude and GSD which corresponds also to the mission planning in advance.
Nevertheless we experience trouble in getting correct GSD values when batch processing the data.



Greetings

Alex

21
Any news here?

I started the same batch process yesterday again and got the same results on a fresh notebook with latest Metashape Pro.

The Orthomosaic got a GSD of 17cm/px from this batch processing, but 4.5cm/px when started "manually".


Could it be that there is a misinterpretation of the resolution of each channel?
I have to add that it is an ALTUM dataset i am processing.

Thanks for your feedback.

Alex

22
Dear Dev-Team,

here's what i experienced with last nights batch processing.

# processed 2 flights with Micasense ALTUM (2 chunks)
# processing the Orthophotos failed with regard to GSD (rest looks good, also multispectral-wise)
# did a manual process for one chunk and reached the expected GSD

Please find screenshots attached.

Also i experience a very present bug in exporting the orthomosaic for one of the ALTUM-datasets. An error occurs while writing and the TIF file stops at 4GB on a Win10 machine. The file can be opened in QGIS, but one part of the area is missing and not displayed.

It could not be solved by variations in the export parameters (LZW, alpha channel and so on) but by difining an outer boundary.

Thanks

Alex

23
General / Re: Mission Planning - Workflow metashape 1.5.1
« on: July 09, 2019, 04:59:36 PM »
Hi Alexey,

thanks for the update - i was thinking the same with WGS84 since it is the baseline across these platforms.

Indeed it is WGS84 (reference comes in directly by the DJI pics in this case).

Steps to consider:

# use the Litchi Hub to import the mission => then save it and you'll have it in your App
# mission is limited to 99 waypoints in Litchi => make use of the possibility to separate in the planning dialogue in Metashape

Greetings

Alex

24
General / Re: Mission Planning - Workflow metashape 1.5.1
« on: July 09, 2019, 01:43:26 PM »
Any news on that, Vardaloupas?

I am trying to import the kml of a orbit-like mission to Litchi, but getting a strict line of waypoints alonq the equator. 
Looks like there's something wrong with my reference system.

Did anybody test this feature with Litchi?
Which projection / reference system (EPSG?) did you use?

Thanks and greetings

Alex

25
Hello Alexey,

thanks a lot for your reply.
I know it's not easy to deal with all the different camera models and fw updates and settings and stuff...

Ok, so:

1) I didn't know what exactly you mean. Is there a separate log i can create for the panel calibration, or is it the concole messages i could add here?

2) When i imported the values manually, i did so by importing the corresponding csv-table to my panel. The two missing bands were then filled out.
So i followed your recommendation and by zapping through the primary channels to find out about the masks i found images of specific bands that had no mask at all. I corrected this by applying a new mask and everything is fine now.

So what i learned now is to check this manually and to take the calibration pictures at a shorter distance (they were maybe too small for autodetection of the grey panel).

It could be also a nice feature for those users who do multispectral work if Metashape would give a notification if masks are missing after autodetection (or is it that ratio given by numbers i.e. 3/5 in the calibration dialogue?) or if the size or shape of the masks varies too much between the bands (which indicates a faulty autodetection).

Nevertheless thanks for your great support and looking forward to compare now the RedEdges against the ALTUM.
:)

Greetings

Alex

26
You could import your points as markers, but this only works as long as there is an altitude available.   ;D

27
Most GIS solutions can do this easily.

I would recomment QGIS and its point sampling tool. You could even import your points from txt/csv first in a new shape layer and then apply these point coordinates to a DEM (or several different DEMs for comparison) and you will get a table of all the heights extracted.

Cheers
Alex

28
Hello Alexey,

with the current version of Metashape (1.5.2.7838) i experienced another issue yesterday.

I did a comparison between Micasense Rededge-M and MX after there was a firmware update from Micasense and created 2 different chunks for this.
I wanted to check the PPK process and the offset of the Orthomosaics later.

When the processing was finished the Orthos looked not like RGBs but more like green and blue colors. Looks like red might be missing, even though every exposure has all bands available. Primary channel is set to default.

Because it looks like red band is somehow missing, i switched the primary band to red and found a black ortho (birghtness level gives no improvement here), even though all bands are fine in their single TIFs.

Panel calibration is partly failing (s. attachement) and 2 bands are not detected automatically. This might be another reason. On the other hand when i import panel settings manually it shows nothing better.

Thanks for possible ideas.

Greetings from Germany

Alex

29
General / Re: Potree - point cloud export
« on: April 09, 2019, 04:05:23 PM »
Hi Markus,

the original post is rather outdated i guess or maybe i just don't find the proper way to proceed from step to step.
Is your hint below still valid, or does it neet some updates due to new versions of PotreeConverter and Metashape?

Thanks for your support.


Alex




Hi,

Try this:
- Download potree: https://github.com/potree/potree
- Unpack the zip file generated by photoscan into the potree/resources/pointclouds directory
- Copy and rename examples/viewer.js and replace 'path:         "../resources/pointclouds/vol_total/cloud.js"' with the path to your own point cloud
- Deploy on a web server (either remote or a local web server such as apache or nginx)
- Open URL in browser. When using a local web server, make sure you are using a correct URL, i.e. starting with "http://localhost" instead of "file:///"

edit:
If nothing shows up, take a look at your browsers debug console messages. Debug console can be opened in chrome and firefox with ctrl + shift + i

30
General / Re: Filtering Ground Points on sloped surfaces
« on: March 15, 2019, 08:47:04 AM »
Strange Result.
Maybe an external tool can help in your situation. Cloudcompare offers interesting filter plugins and classification possibilities.  You will find them easily by searching the web.

Take a look at the CSF plugin for example: https://www.cloudcompare.org/doc/wiki/index.php?title=CSF_(plugin)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6