Agisoft Vs Competitors

[codral]

Hey there,

I know this is a bit of a cheeky place to ask this, but I'm only seriously considering Pix4d VS Agisoft at the moment.

I've used the Agisoft trial fairly extensively and also the Pix4D trial. 

I note that Pix4D really holds your hand, it is very much plug and play, but that is what I like least about it...  I've read that it's much more a Survey package than Agi though (I'm a Surveyor, my company is researching UAV's and I do not want to be constantly swapping software if I can avoid it).

I've been googling like crazy but there's not much info out there, and am trying to find out figures on:
Useful parameters difference (i.e. which software allows editing more advance parameters).
Processing speed differences
ease of placing GCP's, Datum transformations etc
whether Agisoft is going to follow the Survey line or concentrate on photos in the future

If anyone could point me towards a document which detials any of this stuff i'd really appreciate it!

[r0xx]

I've used Pix4d for quite a while and am PhotoScan for almost half a year now...
I'd definitely go with PhotoScan! I've had MUCH worse results with Pix4d and if you're like me and like to have control over your stuff (Of course you have to know more than with Pix4d) but on the other hand get better results, I'd go with PhotoScan everytime again...

[StevenF]

I recently tried Pix4D mapper with a few small test sets. It failed to align my images every time even with the high quality sets that had initial exterior orientation and camera calibration. That was an instant deal killer for me, so I can't comment on later steps of their process such as dense cloud or ortho generation.

I also have some experience with Imagine Photogrammetry and SocetGXP. Triangulation is much much faster and easier in PhotoScan than either of these programs. With regard to dense point clouds, Imagine EATE will occasionally produce very noisy dense point clouds for some image pairs, but the SGM extension is probably much better. SocetGXP produces excellent dsm's and dtm's, but I personally prefer the point cloud output which it doesn't offer. I actually prefer ortho generation in both these programs to PhotoScan since you can choose to use an imported dtm, they have some options for radiometric correction, and they both have good seamline editing tools.

Overall I prefer PhotoScan to any other photogrammetry program I've used. My main gripe with the program is the memory limitation issues that come up when dealing with large sets of images, which you may run into for survey work.  Other software packages will work with the available memory to get the job done, but in PhotoScan YOU have to structure your project into chunks or tiles to get the job done with your available memory. If they fixed this design flaw and added some ortho generation options I'd be happy as a clam, but it's still the best out there in my opinion.

[codral]

excellent info so far guys, really appreciate it, keep it coming   

Also can Agi do stuff like NDVI classification of NIR photos?  I've read that Pix4d can but cannot find much info on it.

[green]

Hi,

Why Autodesk has so many products?
- ImageModeler
- Recap
- Memento
- 123D Catch
- Photofly (dead project)

- Does Autodesk face a challenge to make a single competitive product?
- Where Autodesk stands in this market?

[Marcel]

Hi,

Why Autodesk has so many products

I'm just happy they did not purchase Agisoft/Photoscan already.

[green]

Hi,

Why Autodesk has so many products

I'm just happy they did not purchase Agisoft/Photoscan already.

1 - Why (what is the reason for that)?
2 - Did Autodesk offer that to Agisoft?
3 - How Agisoft can compete with so many products out there?

[Pixel UAV]

Ill put my two cents in.
I am a surveyor
I have never used Pix4d (but surveying friends do)
My favourite features that photoscan does well are
-easy to find and place GCP's (Pix4D sucks at this)
-creates very good meshes for a final result.  A very good way to import into survey packages as you don't have so many points to deal with.  I believe Pix4D does this but can only make a grid of points so you loose detail(although they are working on improving this when i last checked).  Photoscan creates a proper mesh with extra point density where needed
-a very customised work workflow.  Once you understand the setting and parameters you can tune your workflow for best or fastest results very easily.  The parameters can also be changed half way through, unlike Pix4D

How that helps

[Marcel]

1 - Why (what is the reason for that)?

No specific reason other than Autodesk having a habit of buying every 3D program out there (and development of these programs don't necessarily benefit from getting bought by Autodesk).

-a very customised work workflow.  Once you understand the setting and parameters you can tune your workflow for best or fastest results very easily.  The parameters can also be changed half way through, unlike Pix4D

I think if Agisoft would spend some time on updating the documentation and making the programs settings a bit more clear, this would make Photoscan much simpler for beginners.  There is a lot of confusion among beginning users because none of the settings are explained in the program itself (and compared to other programs the settings are often not self-explanatory). As a new user you have to search the documentation (and often the forum) to find out what things do.

If every setting had a small tooltip or a link to the documentation explaining the setting then this would make a big difference in usability and make the program less scary for new users.

[Dvo]

I have tested both pix4d and agisoft for numerous projects (aerial imaging of orchards and horticultural row crops using both modified Canon powershots and Tetracam ADC). And fuerthermore done extensive groundtruthing of NDVI maps created from mosaics. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.

In favor of Agisoft:

Price if you only need one license and will use all year round. pix4d price includes 2 licenses and also provide options for monthly rentals.

Notably better quality mosaics in terms of intensity values.
Can (after reflectance calibration) create a NDVI map from the mosaic that reflects general patterns well.
pix4dmapper produces many artefacts in the mosaic (stripes of differing intensity for example) and it is necessary to create a reflectance map from the mosaic for index calculations - another procesing step (and time!) and the output formats are not readable by standard image processing programs.

Setting up images (adding, deleting, dynamic links between screens) much more flexible.

More control over parameters of processes. With experience can get good solutions just as rapidly or even faster than pix4dmapper.


In favor of pix4dmapper:

Better job aligning chunks (even without GCPs in many cases). In both, better to avoid mutiple chunks if possible.

Better technical support. Always get a reply and followup from technical support staff. With Agisoft, seems to be a roulette whether you get any response at all.

Easier for non-technical people to use (a target market for pix4dmapper)

Provide satellite map background - often useful for project setup

Comprehensive camera database, easily updated

Can process Tetracam ADC images; although mosaics have serious quality problems due to limitations of this camera. Have not been able to successfully process any Tetracam ADC projects using Agisoft to date.

On a related note, better documentation.

We have also presented a conference paper comparing (some aspects) of the two programs; available to any interested.

[Wishgranter]

Few weeks ago wanted to test another sw for photogrammetry, but have asked on their forum with my WISHGRANTER account one simple thing to get reply from user there. But they BLOCKED my IP  and even deactivated accounts there so my "name" is very well know to them and they fear my Q/A on their app... feel a bit happy....

They compared AGI with their sw, so wanted know what settings they used for that reconstruction,
that mean they are a bit nervous what we can do with agi :-D

Ok back to thread stuff. AGI is not the lifesaver on everything but the easy work, good results and this forum is full of people who help other, yes could be even better but as you see we have solved a lot of yours problems too and with very fast reply...   not everything is easy to implement to Photoscan and there are special cases that need a  bit longer to solve....

Not everything can be solved over day or so but im not alone who want and can help you. So when have problems feel free to ask... 

Marcel can share the data so can test it with my knowledge of the AGI software ??

[Dvo]

Hi Wishgranter

I have a Tetracam ADC project I was able to process with pix4dmapper and get a high quality mosaic. Be happy to provide you the images (RAW or processed TIF?) to see whether you can get a mosaic using Photoscan Pro (I was not able to) and pass on details of steps/parameters.

[Wishgranter]

Hi DVO, OK lets look what is possible to get out. Upload the data and send it to muzeumhb@gmail.com will see what we can do...

[green]

found this article:
http://www.pi3dscan.com/index.php/instructions/item/agisoft-vs-capturingreality

what do you think?

[Arie]

Interesting! Finally some competition for Agisoft... 
Though not quite as feature-rich and polished as Agisoft.
Applied for Demo-version.