Messages

1

General / Processing fan of images

« on: August 02, 2017, 12:49:31 PM »

Good Day,

I'd like to know if there is a way to process fan of images; each fan consists of a set of images taken by rotating the camera around its focal point, typically column-wise; each fan portrays the same object from different stations.
 
I found a 2014 brochure that claims "PhotoScan 1.1 processes series of image fans captured from the same position —
a camera station" (http://airgon.com/Agisoft_PhotoScan.pdf). However a search for "fan" in manual 1.3 found no matches.

Thanks and cheers!

FT

2

General / Re: Labeled Contours

« on: May 16, 2017, 11:19:41 PM »

Hi Alexey

I have uploaded at the ftp site a file with the contour settings, and  a short video on the saving problem.

Thanks and cheers!
Fulvio

3

General / Re: Labeled Contours

« on: May 09, 2017, 04:02:45 PM »

Good Day, Alexey

Yes, no problem at all!

Please let me know where I can upload the files.

Cheers!
Fulvio

4

General / Re: Labeled Contours

« on: April 29, 2017, 12:53:28 PM »

Thanks a lot, Alexey

I installed 1.3.1 and noticed a couple of things:
1) Contours "without intersections" failed when in worked fine with 1.3 (same DTM file, same contour interval). Got message 1 in attached file
2) Deselected "without intersections" and 1.3.1 generated contours. However, Photoscan is stuck saving the file after contour generation. After 1 hour it was still 0%. Before generating contours, saving was instantaneous. Retried, same thing see message 2 in attached file
3) When contour lines are exported to dxf, then labels are gigantic and cover the whole drawing, when text is scaled to decent size (e.g., 0.2 m), the labels simply float around and are not along their contour lines, see Items 3 in attached file

Thanks and cheers!
Fulvio

5

General / Re: Labeled Contours

« on: April 21, 2017, 04:38:41 PM »

Thanks a lot, Alexey!

I ran a few examples using the script that you suggested. The contour labels are not located along each contour line, as typical and advisable for readability, but they are located at the center of the polygon delimited by the contour line. As a result, in case of nested contour lines, it is pretty much impossible to read the elevations of the contours.

Please let me know if there is an improved script or if a beta version is available that includes labeling.

Thanks and cheers!
Fulvio

6

General / Labeled Contours

« on: March 29, 2017, 05:08:52 PM »

Good Day, everyone!

In Version 1.3, is there a way to label contours when exporting as DXF?

Contours without labels are pretty useless...

Thanks!
FT

7

Feature Requests / Re: Orthophoto Image Priority and Contour Labeling

« on: March 29, 2017, 04:47:04 PM »

Good Day, All

I was wondering if the option for labeling contour lines exported in AutoCAD DXF format is now available.

Thanks!
FT

8

Bug Reports / Version 1.3.0, build 3772 (64 bit): No option for markers overall accuracy

« on: March 18, 2017, 12:53:23 AM »

Hello Everyone!

Just switched to 1.3.0, build 3772. When importing  marker coordinates, in 1.2, there was an option to import the marker overall accuracy. This option is gone in 1.3: by ticking "Accuracy" one needs to enter the accuracy in x, y, and z directions, see attached figure. However, the marker pane only shows overall accuracy, and no x, y, z accuracy value is imported even if selected.

Thanks!
FT

9

General / More detailed model within a larger model

« on: March 15, 2017, 10:53:07 AM »

Good Day to All,

In an aerial survey, I have taken a smaller resolution set of photos of an entire area, A, to be surveyed. Right after that, I have flown (with the same camera, lens, etc.) over a smaller area B (comprised in area A) to take higher resolution photos from a lower height AGL. Surveyed ground control points (GCPs) in Area B were the same as in Area A.

My system was equipped with RTK GNSS, so the camera locations are also known to a fair degree of accuracy (say 10 cm).

In order to effectively have a single model with area B more detailed than the remainder of area A, I have done the following:
1) In a single file, process  each flight in a separate chunk:
1.1) Run photo alignment,
1.2) Imported the GCPs in each chunk
1.3) Adjusted each GCP in the relevant photos
1.4) Run Optimization. At this point, each chunk was georeferenced and its camera calibration optimized.

2) Workflow => Merge Chunks (I DID NOT do Workflow=> Align Chunks before this). Merged the 2 chunks; the merged chunk correctly had 2 camera calibrations, one per set of photos, as I wanted.

3) The GCPs in the merged chunk were doubled, i.e. in the Reference => Markers Pane, I had 2 Markers named 001, 2 Markers named 002, and so on; per each pair, one Marker provides errors for photos in Chunk A, the other Marker shows errors for photos in Chunk B. On each picture containing a GCP, I had two flags with the same Marker identifier (e.g. 001). I did not touch them, but I am sure that the GCPs (Markers) should be merged somehow.

4) Run Optimize Cameras on the merged chunk: for each pair of Markers, errors decreased considerably for each Marker.

5) Run Workflow => Build Dense Cloud; Build Mesh; Build Texture;  Build Orthomosaic.

Questions:
1) Is my workflow correct to get the most out of the higher resolution set of photos B?
2) Is my workflow correct to get the most out of the GNSS RTK data for camera locations?
3) How and where in my workflow should I merge GCPs (Markers), if that should be done?

Thanks a lot and cheers!
FT