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 - MaciekK

Pages: [1] 2
1
General / Re: P4RTK OPTIMIZE CAMERA ALIGNMENT
« on: September 23, 2021, 09:48:19 AM »
maybe I put it wrong in the previous post - using the B1, B2 coefficients improved the alignment at higher flight altitude for mapping larger areas
MK

2
General / Re: P4RTK OPTIMIZE CAMERA ALIGNMENT
« on: September 23, 2021, 01:43:24 AM »
geomaticist,
P1 is primarily about greater efficiency. But also quality. Don't get me wrong, the accuracy is similar, but the stability of the solution and the geometry of the photos is a class higher. For example, during the P4RTK mission I had a point multiplier of 2.5 - 3, on P1 I have 4.5 - 5.5, it changes a lot. The camera is less susceptible to the environment, the calibration parameters are very repeatable, etc. It also has its drawbacks - size, weight, but I prefer m300 and P1. As for your earlier questions - I confirm for P1 I only use K2, for P4RTK usually K3 but sometimes only K2. B1 and B2 always off in the case of P4RTK. For P1 and large areas, e.g. 600 ha, the inclusion of B1 and B2 gave better results.
MK

3
General / Re: P4RTK OPTIMIZE CAMERA ALIGNMENT
« on: September 23, 2021, 12:12:13 AM »
geomaticist,
I have completed dozens of P4RTK missions, and my experience shows that you should not use K4. I tested various variants and I am inclined to say that where you do not have to use K3 also. The K2, K3 and K4 coefficients are strongly correlated. The P4RTK camera does not give 100% repeatability - probably high depends on the temperature humidity ... So I tested how much I can reduce the K-factor. The best results were achieved using only K2 and very precise control points - a medium-sized mission about 50ha, flight at an altitude of 70m. Now I fly P1 and also most of the missions are only K2
MK

4
General / Re: Accuracy in Reference Geotagged images
« on: September 04, 2021, 09:56:31 PM »
Hi,
You probably have accuracy recorded in the emotion file, while wingtra only gives you coordinates. However, I would not count that the addition of determining the camera coordinate would be better than 2-3 cm, even though the file has an accuracy of about 1 cm
MK

5
General / Re: Accuracy in Reference Geotagged images
« on: September 04, 2021, 07:27:24 PM »
vdelpuerto,
set the accuracy to 0.03m and do the optimization.
MK

6
General / Re: K3 or not
« on: August 30, 2021, 04:28:58 PM »
Oleg,

I don't know if you are asking this exactly, but * bin files containing gnss trajectory are in rtcm3 format. To use them for PPK calculations for camera coordinates use e.g. topodrone, klauppk or RTKlib.
MK

7
General / Re: CGP's and altitude
« on: August 16, 2021, 01:31:35 PM »
Hi,
it looks like all errors have the same sign. So there is a vertical shift of the coordinate system. Probably setting the aprori error for GCP to 0.015m will improve the solution.

Maciek

8
Python and Java API / Re: dense cloud validates
« on: August 05, 2021, 09:04:20 PM »
Paul,

Thanks. I'll try to write a similar script. As always, you are very helpful

best regards

9
Python and Java API / dense cloud validates
« on: August 05, 2021, 09:00:10 AM »
Hi everyone,
do you have any idea for a script that validates the height of a dense cloud on known points? Of course you have to calculate the standard deviation, RMS etc. I mean the idea - what methods to use?

Maciek

10
I'm sorry to say this, but do I understand correctly that you are doing a project of 18,000 photos on a laptop? Who are you expecting? Recently, I was making a project of 8,000 photos, the MS was about 12 hours (aligment, dense cloud, orto). I have ryzen7, 64gb ram, rtx2070 super, 1tb ssd samsung 970 evo plus. Just change the computer.

11
General / Re: RTK + single GCP
« on: June 07, 2021, 11:17:01 PM »
tom_rc33,

Can you try to set real values, e.g. 0.03m for cameras and 0.01 for GCP? It usually works for me. If these near-true error values produce very bad results, you have to look elsewhere for the problem.
MK

12
General / Re: K3 or not
« on: May 14, 2021, 11:11:37 AM »
Alexey, thanks for the advice, of course it works. Do you think that the limitation to the K2 param makes sense, I work with the Zenmuse P1 sensor. I have the impression that when limited to K2, a dense cloud is generated faster.
Regards Maciek

13
General / K3 or not
« on: May 11, 2021, 09:46:00 PM »
Hi,
Is it possible to perform photo alignment without using the K3 parameter, maybe some Python script? If it doesn't make sense please correct me but when optimizing my cameras I often turn off K3 and the results are good and the calibration seems more correct than with K3. I mean a situation where I have few points in a sparse cloud
Regards Maciek

14
General / Re: Gradual selection
« on: May 04, 2021, 01:08:43 AM »
that's exactly what I meant, I will test it soon
thanks Paul

15
General / Gradual selection
« on: May 03, 2021, 02:14:30 PM »
Hi guys,
can I use gradual selection only for selected photos from the project? I know that this tool works on a sparse cloud and not in photos, but I mean the situation that in some photos, e.g. with a forest, I have few points (e.g. 30) and I would not want to delete them anymore, while others have a lot of them (e.g. 10,000 ). I think that such a disproportion has a negative effect on the aligment results. Maybe there is another way? except of course manual.

MK

Pages: [1] 2