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 - jnb

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
General / Re: Mask defocus area function is broken
« on: January 15, 2022, 06:19:46 PM »
Indeed, thank you for pointed this out

General / Mask defocus area function is broken
« on: January 12, 2022, 07:35:42 PM »

The Mask defocus area function seems to be broken, as well as the Depth threshold one.
The mask seems to be correctly generated during the calculation (and is seen on screen during 1s) but at the end of calculation it only applies to the whole mesh (defocus areas are not masked)

Does anyone else have the same problem?


General / Re: Agisoft Metashape 1.8.0 pre-release
« on: January 04, 2022, 06:12:22 PM »

Mask defocus area seems to be broken in released 1.8

Edit : I have the same issue in 1.7.6

General / Re: Defocus masks
« on: May 30, 2021, 06:40:13 PM »

I have exactly he same issue. It seems to me to be a bit better in the latest build, but it could also came from the project I am working on.


Unfortunately, the issue is still here in version 1.7.3 build 12473.
Bad mesh in difficult areas compared to 1.6 and and occasionally bad depth estimation for the depth maps.
See screenshots attached.

Indeed, I read too fast the tweak...
For the rest, I couldn't agree more

Unfortunately, this tweak as no impact on this issue. To my understanding, this is a valid tie point threshold, see Alexey post here :
It seems to me that the new depth map method deals differently with low tie points areas, leading to no depth reconstruction in those.

i really don't know if this is relavant, but lowering the threshold to 10 won't change the limiting neighbors to 40 parameter
Code: [Select]
filtering neighbors with too low common points, threshold=10...
avg neighbors before filtering: 72 (0% filtered out)
limiting neighbors to 40 best...

I did not as this seems to have no impact on the concerned area. But still, this is a strange behaviour. The main issue here I think is the lack of depth information in this particular area of interest.
PM mark depth map method also seems to not take into account the bounding box.

I have uploaded my psx with both PM and SGM versions, tested with +- 70 and 35 cameras if someone wants to look at it :!Apz9qKkthJ4ywl8fYCfKLbMlbGi1?e=XuLJh2

Also, if this help to visualise the problem, here are some comparisons (heatmap and point) between SGM as reference and PM models (on +-35 cameras)

Hello Mak,

Yes indeed !
 i7-7820HK and GTX 1070 SLI

Hello Paulo,

The less images, the less this issue seems to be visible. In my mind, missing parts are likely to be extrapolated the same way, leading to a close result between the two versions.
But if I want this area to be fully reconstructed, I need to use more images, which lead to the previously mentioned problem.
Nevertheless, you can see on the depth maps that depth is not estimated on this area with the new method, whereas it is with the old one.

But I agree with you, the new mesh is really good and detailed, but on this spot, which is a shame !

If someone wants to play with it, I updated the sample data set to be more comprehensive.
Just to be on the safe side, I also reprocessed it with PM mark and SGM mark, with all others settings to default. Medium quality, Mild filtering.
Here is the tweak given by Alexey to change the depth map process : BuildDepthMaps/pm_enable

edit : @RHenriques, just saw your post. If you have the time, I am curious to see your results with the more complete data sample. I also didn't try to process it myself in high quality, as it is too time consuming and not needed for my work. This is I think the only difference.

Thank you for testing @RHenriques. Unfortunately, the error in the mesh is difficult to see on the sample as the data set is vastly incomplete and was only made to share image quality.
Alexey reprocessed the whole set on his side in high quality and the result in v1.7.3 is alas not good as you can see in attachements. He also processed the sample, and the v1.7.3 is also incorrect compared to the v1.6.

PM mark is the new depth map generation method introduced in v 1.7, that's all I know !

Thank you Alexey for looking into it.
Here is the differences between PM mark and SGM mark depth maps. As you can see, on some PM mark depth maps, depth is inaccurate.

Here is a link for data sample :!Apz9qKkthJ4ywl8fYCfKLbMlbGi1?e=YvOVhp
Photos are 8bits tiff converted from 16bits raw.

But feature extraction is pretty much the same between v1.6 and 1.7

Pages: [1] 2 3 4