31
General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.0.0 pre-release
« on: August 31, 2013, 12:13:58 PM »
I really liked the 'filer by markers' button that was on the photo pane. Any chance of putting that back on there?
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.
32
General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.0.0 pre-release
« on: August 29, 2013, 03:25:20 AM »
RHenriques, that particular portion of my ortho was projected in 15 images??? Both versions I ran with exactly the same data set and got significantly different results?
It's a mystery to me!
It's a mystery to me!
33
General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.0.0 pre-release
« on: August 28, 2013, 01:36:47 PM »
I cannot get it to export an ortho as good as the last version. I have tried numerous settings and not had any luck.
Mainly in regards to vertical features, such as my vehicle. See attached samples...
Mainly in regards to vertical features, such as my vehicle. See attached samples...
34
General / Re: Agisoft PhotoScan 1.0.0 pre-release
« on: August 27, 2013, 11:05:47 AM »
Awesome work Agisoft!
A great software package that just keeps getting better!!!
A great software package that just keeps getting better!!!
35
General / Re: Point Cloud Generation of XYZ files
« on: August 27, 2013, 10:45:55 AM »
x, y, z, red, green, blue, normals (pitch roll and yaw)
If you are only wanting an xyz point cloud uncheck the boxes that say 'point colors' and 'point normals' during export. If your post-processing software can accept these values then leave them checked, up to you? I personally do not use the point normals but I do utilise the rgb values.
As for the las file... not too sure?? I think I may have encountered that error before but I cannot remember what the problem was?
If you are only wanting an xyz point cloud uncheck the boxes that say 'point colors' and 'point normals' during export. If your post-processing software can accept these values then leave them checked, up to you? I personally do not use the point normals but I do utilise the rgb values.
As for the las file... not too sure?? I think I may have encountered that error before but I cannot remember what the problem was?
36
General / Re: Relative vs. Absolute accuracies
« on: August 19, 2013, 12:36:22 PM »
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the input. Although if I was going to go to those sort of lengths I probably may as well just set up my GPS, log some static and RTK in some GCP's. You are right though, I would have no redundancies to check against but for some of my 'less important' jobs this is not really an issue.
I have just done some testing of my own with the same set of data (30ha quarry site) both with ground control and completely without. The results are basically no different... when it comes to volume calculations anyway. Obviously the 2 data sets are a few metres apart but the relative accuracies look pretty good.
The table attached shows the differences between the 2 tests (note: the base models for the calcs hold a certain degree of estimation so with this in mind you could argue that the results are all but the same??)...
If anyone else has done any testing on this I would be keen to know your results??
Cheers!
Thanks for the input. Although if I was going to go to those sort of lengths I probably may as well just set up my GPS, log some static and RTK in some GCP's. You are right though, I would have no redundancies to check against but for some of my 'less important' jobs this is not really an issue.
I have just done some testing of my own with the same set of data (30ha quarry site) both with ground control and completely without. The results are basically no different... when it comes to volume calculations anyway. Obviously the 2 data sets are a few metres apart but the relative accuracies look pretty good.
The table attached shows the differences between the 2 tests (note: the base models for the calcs hold a certain degree of estimation so with this in mind you could argue that the results are all but the same??)...
If anyone else has done any testing on this I would be keen to know your results??
Cheers!
37
General / Re: Relative vs. Absolute accuracies
« on: August 19, 2013, 02:27:27 AM »
It seems I have a question that no one knows the answer too? Surely not??
38
General / Relative vs. Absolute accuracies
« on: July 30, 2013, 05:06:02 AM »
Example:
Using a UAV for aerial mapping/volume calculations with or without GCP's over small stockpiles (200m x 200m)
With GCP's obviously the absolute accuracies will increase significantly but will the relative accuracies change/improve?
I have a client who just wants volumes of their stockpiles and I am wondering if I would get satisfactory results without the use of GCP's, as they do not need the data to be accurately geo-referenced.
I am hoping that I can get away without the use of GCP's as it would save me a lot of time and my client a lot of money??
Using a UAV for aerial mapping/volume calculations with or without GCP's over small stockpiles (200m x 200m)
With GCP's obviously the absolute accuracies will increase significantly but will the relative accuracies change/improve?
I have a client who just wants volumes of their stockpiles and I am wondering if I would get satisfactory results without the use of GCP's, as they do not need the data to be accurately geo-referenced.
I am hoping that I can get away without the use of GCP's as it would save me a lot of time and my client a lot of money??
39
General / Re: After build geometry model is completely black
« on: July 19, 2013, 04:09:26 PM »
Hi Alexey,
That is exactly what had happened. I did change the folder location containing the images.
Thank you, problem solved.
That is exactly what had happened. I did change the folder location containing the images.
Thank you, problem solved.
40
General / After build geometry model is completely black
« on: July 19, 2013, 08:24:50 AM »
This is the first time I have encountered this but after building geometry both the texture and shading were completely black? I ran it again and it was fine. Has anyone encountered this before? What may have caused it to happen?
Cheers.
Cheers.
41
General / Re: Capturing a Coin and Merging Chunks
« on: July 11, 2013, 03:26:15 AM »
I really have no idea if this would work or not but...
Could you try having it suspended by something like a human hair held on with a tiny dot of super-glue? That way you could get all around it in one go with only a very small blemish to fix up after processing?
Just a thought!
Could you try having it suspended by something like a human hair held on with a tiny dot of super-glue? That way you could get all around it in one go with only a very small blemish to fix up after processing?
Just a thought!
42
General / Re: Photo Alignment
« on: July 08, 2013, 08:06:54 PM »
That's a mystery to me then. I know that the Gatewing is definitely compatible with Photoscan so can't see why it hasn't worked for you?
Hopefully someone else has some better answers for you?
Good luck!
Hopefully someone else has some better answers for you?
Good luck!
43
General / Re: Photo Alignment
« on: July 08, 2013, 10:31:51 AM »
Did you select 'ground control' as the method for aligning?
44
General / Re: Geometry type requirement for 2D orthomosaic
« on: July 03, 2013, 01:49:49 PM »
I use the high setting and always have done. I utilize the sparse point cloud though to create DEM's so I need to use high, any lower and the sparse point cloud is a little too sparse.
45
General / Re: Power lines and suspended objects??
« on: July 03, 2013, 01:45:26 PM »
Good point. That makes a lot of sense.
