Forum

Author Topic: Agisoft Vs Competitors  (Read 65716 times)

jet

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #15 on: November 30, 2015, 09:47:29 PM »
I have tried the demo version. Just wow  :o
Nice mesh almost without artefacts and without any masking of the images. Let alone timing.
Stunning :o
I hope Agisoft will be able to reconsider their engine to achive same results.

Also there is a demo from ten24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWBsMaPPWTU as they wrote it is raw data without any editing. Firstly I didn't believe it. I learned about the software from this demo yesterday and was playing around with it all night and day.
Now I love and hate it xD
Hate to know there is something much better than your workflow but it is not in production yet. I really hope Agisoft will react fast.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2015, 09:57:08 PM by jet »

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #16 on: December 01, 2015, 03:27:21 AM »
Jet that is a RAW results from James. if don't believe can showcase it to you, whole dataset recon from start to end, timing and rendering.... have the data,  have the sw over 2+ years already....

----------------
www.mhb.sk

jet

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #17 on: December 01, 2015, 05:43:44 AM »
Jet that is a RAW results from James. if don't believe can showcase it to you, whole dataset recon from start to end, timing and rendering.... have the data,  have the sw over 2+ years already....

Yeah, my point was that I didn't believe it at first, because Agisoft can't produce such artefact-free mesh without manual clean-up. After I learned the software they used and tested it I see now it is totally possible.

green

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2015, 10:57:01 PM »
Interesting! Finally some competition for Agisoft...  ;D
Though not quite as feature-rich and polished as Agisoft.
Applied for Demo-version.
well, their engine is superior(much faster than Agisoft)! They can add features later on!

green

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2015, 11:05:08 PM »
I have tried the demo version. Just wow  :o
Nice mesh almost without artefacts and without any masking of the images. Let alone timing.
Stunning :o
I hope Agisoft will be able to reconsider their engine to achive same results.

Also there is a demo from ten24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWBsMaPPWTU as they wrote it is raw data without any editing. Firstly I didn't believe it. I learned about the software from this demo yesterday and was playing around with it all night and day.
Now I love and hate it xD
Hate to know there is something much better than your workflow but it is not in production yet. I really hope Agisoft will react fast.
I think once CapturingReality prices their product the same way as Agisoft, Agisoft will start facing a challenge on the market share!

Arie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2015, 02:13:54 AM »
You're completely right! I've been testing their software and I must say it is very impressive!

Just to make the Agisoft team aware of it, a dataset (+ 8000 aerial 24mpx images) took a couple of days to align with PS while it took only 3 hours to align with capturingreality.

Time for some serious optimizations in Photoscan...  ;D
How about feature detection and matching on gpu basis?  ;)

pastouf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #21 on: December 07, 2015, 12:06:31 PM »
Arie,

could you detailled parameters.
For 1200 images, PS take 3 hours only...

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2015, 12:10:22 PM »
Pastouf, aligning 1200 images take mostly 10-20 mins in that solution. aligning 56.000 x 36 Mpix images take aprox  9 hours...   mostly 40k/20k detected used points... 
----------------
www.mhb.sk

pastouf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2015, 07:08:47 PM »
10/20 min for 1200 images!!! :'(

i have bi-xeon E5-2650 2Ghz, 64Go, SSD, et for 300 images, align time is 48 min...

could you detailed your PC please.
I hope that my PC is not too old...

aggieair

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #24 on: December 07, 2015, 08:51:43 PM »
I don't think Pix4D had the "classify ground" component to make a DTM as well as the DSM.  We really use both outputs, and that was the distinction for us.

green

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2015, 09:05:47 PM »
You're completely right! I've been testing their software and I must say it is very impressive!

Just to make the Agisoft team aware of it, a dataset (+ 8000 aerial 24mpx images) took a couple of days to align with PS while it took only 3 hours to align with capturingreality.

Time for some serious optimizations in Photoscan...  ;D
Time is money!

How about feature detection and matching on gpu basis?  ;)
Some users think Photoscan is the King of photogrammetry!  ;)

TheDude

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #26 on: December 09, 2015, 12:07:53 AM »
I have tested the software on a dataset with 1000 24MPx images.
The alignment time is quite impressive (10mn versus 40mn with PS).

However the orthophoto generated is not fantastic, it seems quite blurry as if it was generated by blending pictures instead of stitching them together. Does anyone know if that is the case?

jmos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2015, 03:25:13 PM »
Hi, just went through the process of trialing/considering different products.
Considered Agisoft, PIX4D, Imagine Photogrammetry, Inpho, Imagine UAV and a few others

We fly forest areas for harvest tracking, Silviculture, forest age class/species/stocking/height mapping and other.
At the moment we use a Hasselblad H4D-60 mounted in a Cessna 172, having timing issues between camera and GPS/IMU so processing images with only GCP's at the moment. Control comes from out sourced Ortho's at 2m accuracy.

Our goal was to produce ortho mosaics and view imagery in SAFA(Stereo Analyst for ArcGIS)
Now looking at use of point cloud data for Forest height inventory.

We have been very satisfied with the results from Agisoft and Alexey has been very helpful.


tbwester

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2015, 05:18:17 PM »
my experience with pix4d, the results were good, but with photoscan you have more control and the workflow makes a little more sense.

The really great thing about pix4d is that you can process photos in their cloud - so you can process thousands of photos in a few hours.

MeHoo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
    • View Profile
Re: Agisoft Vs Competitors
« Reply #29 on: December 13, 2015, 02:39:43 AM »
My experience with Autodesk's many versions of the same app has been very very poor.  Countless hours spent dealing with Customer Support (for which they really have none other than causing a scene on the forums and then they play damage control), failed alignments, etc.

Frankly I built a monster machine to handle this processing, I don't need their cloud, nor do I wish to pay per scan because if it fails miserably, I'm out.

Agisoft is the way to go IMHO.  Alexey and the team are awesome to deal with and they continually add great features.