Messages

16

General / Re: Cylindrical Orthomosaic Texture Streaking Issue

« on: July 07, 2024, 03:02:04 AM »

Have made some progress. The cylinder is horizontal. When I move the projection origin from the top of the cylinder to the bottom the streaking goes away.

17

General / Cylindrical Orthomosaic Texture Streaking Issue

« on: July 06, 2024, 10:25:46 PM »

Hello,

I am trying to create a cylindrical orthomosaic and am getting strange texture streaking issues. See image attached. I have tried creating the orthomosaic with a mesh, point cloud and DEM without success. Have also tried the hole filling, backface culling and ghosting filters. Any advice on what the problem could be?

Thank you.

18

General / Laser scans won't align with images

« on: April 16, 2024, 01:50:35 PM »

Hello,

I am having difficulties aligning laser scans with images. There are key points detected on the laser scans but there are only 300-400 projections. I have tried guided image matching and it does boost key points to ~3000 (see image attached), although they do not cover the full frame. Is there any other way to detect more key points?

Thanks,
Cody

19

Agisoft Cloud / Re: Agisoft Cloud Bug Reports

« on: February 11, 2023, 04:59:05 AM »

cloud.agisoft.com seems to be down.  When I try to load the webpage I just get a white screen.

20

General / Reduce overlap script - Selectively disable images from two camera groups

« on: October 21, 2022, 09:13:31 PM »

I have a project that used two different cameras.  I'd like to reduce overlap and selectively disable cameras between the two groups.  The goal is to minimize the number of cameras from one of the groups and only use them if there is insufficient overlap using only the first group.  Is this possible in a script?

Thank you

21

General / Laser scan improve image alignment?

« on: May 13, 2022, 10:34:10 PM »

Hello,

I have been looking into including laser scans in my models and am wondering if including them will improve image alignment.  In particular I'm interested in improving systematic error/doming effects.  If I create a photogrammetric model and include laser scans throughout the model can I expect an improvement in image alignment and reduced systematic error/doming?

Best,
Cody

22

General / Re: V1.7.0 - Increased RMS reprojection error

« on: January 07, 2021, 03:43:22 PM »

Thanks Alexey.

23

General / V1.7.0 - Increased RMS reprojection error

« on: January 05, 2021, 09:26:33 PM »

I've noticed an increase in RMS reprojection error in V1.7.0 compared to V1.6.5.  I have attached screen shots of project info from a model processed with the same parameters in both versions.  In V1.7.0 RMS reprojection error is 0.424 px and in V1.6.5 it is 0.331 px.  I also notice that there is a notable decrease in the number of tie points in V1.7.0.  I'm assuming that the difference in RMS is attributed to how the tie points are being selected and filtered.  Also interesting is the increase in tie point multiplicity and increase in max reprojection error in V1.7.0.

Is this expected behavior and why is it happening?  Does this have any effect on model accuracy?  Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

24

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release

« on: January 04, 2021, 07:00:01 PM »

I'm noticing higher reprojection error in this release.  Have there been changes in image alignment to cause this?  On a model processed in 1.6.5 I'm getting ~0.3 pix RMS and in 1.7.0 I'm getting ~ 0.4 pix RMS.

25

General / Re: Export Camera Calibration with Additional Corrections

« on: November 16, 2020, 04:19:59 AM »

For anyone interested, if you only check the parameters that you are interested in fixing rather than "checking all", you can optimize with "fit additional corrections".

26

General / Export Camera Calibration with Additional Corrections

« on: November 14, 2020, 03:01:31 AM »

Is there anyway to export the camera calibration and include the additional corrections?  I would like to use a calibration from one project on another.

Or is there a way to include "fit additional corrections" when optimizing a project when the camera calibration is fixed?  Fit additional corrections is currently greyed out when trying this.

Best,
Cody

27

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release

« on: October 29, 2020, 03:26:38 AM »

I can't seem to use GPU for depth map generation.  I get the following error:

Warning: Device GeForce GTX 1070 Ti ignored because it has 5958/8192 MB available, but 6870 MB required

Log up to that point is attached.  I have two identical GPUs and haven't had any issues like this in the past.

Hello dcobra,

Please check, if it helps to set up the following teak to 40 value, via Advanced Preferences tab -> Tweaks dialog:
main/depth_pm_max_neighbors

Alexey,

Thank you for the suggestion.  It worked.

Best,
Cody

I just finished processing a dense point cloud and the result is amazing.  Much less noise than previous versions.  Great work!

28

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release

« on: October 28, 2020, 04:27:03 PM »

I can't seem to use GPU for depth map generation.  I get the following error:

Warning: Device GeForce GTX 1070 Ti ignored because it has 5958/8192 MB available, but 6870 MB required

Log up to that point is attached.  I have two identical GPUs and haven't had any issues like this in the past.

Hello dcobra,

Please check, if it helps to set up the following teak to 40 value, via Advanced Preferences tab -> Tweaks dialog:
main/depth_pm_max_neighbors

Alexey,

Thank you for the suggestion.  It worked.

Best,
Cody

29

General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.7.0 pre-release

« on: October 27, 2020, 04:30:17 PM »

I can't seem to use GPU for depth map generation.  I get the following error:

Warning: Device GeForce GTX 1070 Ti ignored because it has 5958/8192 MB available, but 6870 MB required

Log up to that point is attached.  I have two identical GPUs and haven't had any issues like this in the past. 

30

General / V 1.6 marker accuracy weighting

« on: March 11, 2020, 02:55:49 AM »

I have noticed that there has been a change in how Metashape weights marker accuracy (measurement accuracy) from V 1.5 to V 1.6.  Marker accuracy seems to have a much stronger weighting in V 1.6.  Lower values (below 0.001m) tend to force the point cloud to conform to the control points, whereas in V 1.5 there was much less of an effect.  The error observed on control points is reduced as the accuracy value is lowered.  Can Agisoft confirm the change and provide some additional info?  Have the other weightings been changed?

Attached are two screen shots of the same project optimized in V 1.5 and V 1.6 with marker accuracy set to 0.0001m.  Note the error on control points is much lower in V 1.6.

Best,
Cody