Wondering if anyone has also used Correlator 3D and how they would compare it to Metashape - mainly for Drone Photogrammetry for large area mapping and surveying type applications. One of the frustrating things I've found in all the software I've used is the automated extraction of a DTM (Digital Terrain Model) from the Surface Model by filtering the trees, structures, and other objects that are not bare ground. I've had to spend hours trial and air with the Metashape settings to get it to work well. Yes, you can manually edit the point cloud but that can be really time consuming when you are talking hundreds of acres of area. And the best settings for one job aren't necessarily the best for another. The other solutions that do it automatically that I've used that don't give you access to the settings are hit and miss (mostly miss) as far as doing a good filtering job. I've heard Correlator 3D does a good job although a bit heavy handed, but I'd prefer a littler over filtering (lops off a few small mounds) than under filtering (leaving elevation rises where there were bushes/trees/cars on flat ground.)
But also interested in overall how it compares, not just the DTM extraction. Not sure if it can handle multispectral image processing? Processing time/efficiency? And also how many export formats it has compared to Metashape?
Topic: Comparison to Correlator 3D? (Read 1423 times)
