Dear Kris, dear Wishgranter,
Please, let us not start a battle here.
First of all, before people start to blame me, I wrote a lot of papers on PhotoScan but also looked at (as far as I see it) almost all other SfM application out there.
I have to agree with both of you. Kris, sure, if 123D Catch it is free, why would one not use it, right? The results are good for a free program, sometimes VERY good as you show yourself. Do you know why? Because the running engine at the SfM stage is from Capture3D:
http://www.acute3d.com/These guys make amazing software but – at least the last time I checked – it is not affordable for an individual or small company (I thought prices started at € 25 000 a few months ago). That is why 123D catch is often so good with organic objects such as your subjects for which – sometimes – the PhotoScan might look inferior. I say might, because I do not know how your PhotoScan workflow is nor if you selected all parameters correctly. Anyhow, let us agree that 123D catch might in some instances deliver better results.
On the other hand, PhotoScan shines when it comes to aerial work and – do not get me wrong – creates some very good models of these organic small artefacts as well. Of course, why would you pay if you can get it for free (with a result sometimes surpassing the payware)? Well, if it works for you and your aims, stick to 123D Catch.
However, do not forget that (as Wishgranter said), 123D it is NOT for commercial purposes and last time I checked (I think about one year ago) you transfer the copyright of your content to Autodesk.
Besides, PhotoScan is THE application when it comes to one package for an integrated workflow. You can have many other free solutions (based on bundler or PhotoSnyth) and these also work reasonably well (check also VisualSfM), but they do not give you:
- the integrated environment of PhotoScan in which you can almost perform all necessary operations to get a very high 3D model (alignment, dense meshing, texturing, georeferencing, decimating etc.)
- the user-friendliness and robustness of PhotoScan. Believe me, I tested it during two years for almost every day.
- the dense meshing is in most instances unsurpassed. As said, I tried many datasets in various programs. In cases most other software would create gaps, PhotoScan nicely created the 3D geometry.
- the interactivity PhotoScan offers. This is PhotoScan’s strength concerning me: you can realign badly aligned images, put GCPs for georeferencing or aligning difficult images that not aligned initially, textures are great (best of all applications, and you can also scale and manipulate them in many ways), you can export and clean the sparse point cloud, there are optimisation steps no single other software has, camera calibrations can be imported, it is back-up by free calibration software, supports 4D, etc. etc.
So in the end, it all comes down to what you want and need. Most people in this forum are from a photogrammetry background and like to work with aerials. Besides, the support of the PhotoScan people is top-notch: you know they will be there to answer all your questions and they will also continuously improve their software. Most importantly: you will always know what happens whit your data and have the ownership of everything you use or create!
Have a good evening,
Geert