Відео

Hi. Yes, it’s possible on Mac. The method is slightly different so you would probably want to read the user guide to see those differences. Good luck!

@ I’m just learning metashape and your channel is amazing! Cheers

Hi - thanks for watching and thank you for the feedback. That’s a UA-cam thing but I’ll try and see if the logo can be repositioned to make the index values legible.

@@geospatialtips I believe it's an option you can turn on or off in UA-cam Studio. Thanks again for the informative video!

Hi - I haven’t tried the classification in the new version yet, but seems I will need to check it out. As for the trees versus ground issue it really depends on a few factors. The swirls will likely be because the model goes to the top of trees, back down to ground, then up another tree and so on. Have you tried a 2.5D mesh that includes the trees? It may help limit those swirls. Also, if you only use classified ground the result might look better, but you may also start to see your trees leaning one way or another and not be straight up any longer.

@geospatialtips Thanks for the response! I actually downgraded to an older version of Metashape. The ground classification worked much better! I found that creating a DEM with only ground points also gave me a higher quality orthomosaic without the swirls in the trees. It really makes a difference, not sure why. I wonder if there's another way of getting better quality orthos with forest cover, without having to do the classification process.

@geospatialtips I actually have another question... Whenever I change coordinates from WGS to my native UTM system, it tilts the whole area by about 30°. I thought this was another issue with the newer version of Metashape, but I had the exact same problem with the older version. The only thing I can think of is it being my new drone, DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise. Is there something in doing wrong when importing photos? Should I be calibrating photos a certain way? Metashape seems to recognize the M3E ...

Hi JSD! Yes you can have multiple meshes and models. I often do the same as you, one for the mosaic and another for volumes. I am not sure if the latest Agisoft version changes anything but you should have the option to not overwrite existing models when making new ones. Also, rename the first model you make before creating the second to make sure they are easy to distinguish.

@geospatialtips Hello Sir! I'll look for that option and rename before creating new items. Sounds like that should do the trick. Thank you! I hope things are going well for you, over there on the other side of the world 🙏

Hi - I'm not too sure, without seeing the data myself. Might just be something to do with the 3T format specifically. If you like, send me a few images, just 5 would be fine, and I will take a look for you? geospatialtips@gmail.com Cheers, Mark

dense cloud is changed to point cloud

I don't believe there is a render option, like you are describing, at least not one that I know of. But I am interested in the issues you are having with the mosaic. Maybe it is just how I am reading your message, so please correct me if I am wrong. The mosaic doesn't have to be like a puzzle (accurate alignment and blending) and could easily be created as a whole/single scene that is exported as a single file, rather than a tiled export. Let me know if I can help a little more?

After the point cloud process. The points collected in the tie-point process will be used to optimize your camera alignment. Thus, if you clean up too many points, you run the risk of having images that are no longer aligned. Also, cleaning the tie points will not affect the region for which the dense cloud is created, as that is determined by the aligned images and the region box. *You would still want to run the gradual selection steps to optimize your tie points though.

Hi - If you have images captured at various altitudes and/or you have oblique images along with those captured at nadir, then I would use the "Adaptive Model" option when optimizing the camera. However, if you have a more simple dataset where images are captured at a single altitude and generally all at nadir, then you do not use adaptive modelling and you would have the boxes checked per the default setting. I hope that helps.

@@geospatialtips It helps a lot! Thanks for the replies 👍

Thanks! Glad to be back and hopefully consistently so from now on :)

Hi - Thanks for the feedback. This video is pretty old now and I think I've got the cursor visible in all videos that follow this one. Time for a redo of the Metshape walkthrough anyway I think! Cheers

@geospatialtips is there any other app you can recommend for photogrammetry that is not complicated and free

Thanks! If you have a suitable dataset I could use, please send it along and I will make the video for you :) geospatialtips@gmail.com

Yes you can. In Metashape, just set the drive letter as the location, like "D:\" and in the node batch file you would put "--root /" -> both without the quotes.

Sure, send me some data and I'll take a look at what we can do with it! geospatialtips@gmail.com

I knew there had to be a simpler way! Thank you :)

You're welcome!

Hi Paul - no, I can't say that I have. But it sounds like something worth a try. So long as the corrections are some kind of average across all of the images, then great. I would be concerned if it is adjusting each image based on it's own data, but if you are getting consistent exposure etc. across all the images, excellent.

@geospatialtips I've tried it after asking this and it turns out pretty good.

You're very welcome! :)

Sounds like it's time for a video update. Thanks for the feedback!

Hi Hans, thanks for the comment. This exclusion was done intentionally. I find that the majority of viewers do not have or do not use RTK enabled drones and thus this was to clearly illustrate what Metashape does with control points if left unchecked and unmanaged. You are of course correct that when we use RTK (more specifically PP-RTK) positions, these should be taken into consideration and used to guide the orientation. RTK is only accurate in a relative sense unless setup on a known points and observed for extended time periods, hence the need to use the "Update" function as you have pointed out. If it was possible, I'd only ever use PP-RTK and then even the "Update" function should become unnecessary. Keep in mind too that ALL positions are only as good as the equipment being used and blind faith in any one of the technologies being used is a risk. If you and the team at RedCatch would like to supply some data and we can make a video together to show the best way to harness RTK, specifically with RedCatch, please do get in touch! Thanks

Welcome!

You could Photoshop it all, but that's a bit of a pain to do. Realistically, with a project of the size you have mentioned, I would create the mosaic in a specialized software, such as OrthoVista. (Bingo would do much the same) In OV you can set it to balance data per flight and across multiple days, edit the radiometry of the images individually, within a region or per flight and so on. Then, create the mosaic which would thus be much better from the start. Any remaining edits for colour, seamlines, balancing etc. can be reviewed and edited and then the mosaic, or just the are you need, can be redone.

@@geospatialtips thanks or the reply. Never heard those software, but ill look it up. Currently im using photoshop to edit the tiled mosaic. The fact that PS cant save georeference information was solved by exporting the tiled mosaic together with the World file (.jgw). Ive never found geospatial software that can edit raster data just like PS did. So the method above can be a workaround

@@mikealpha4462 Yes, the loss of referencing is a pain, but as you say, it can be overcome. OrthoVista is pretty expensive, owned and distributed by Trimble these days, but it certainly gets the job done. You would export rectified images from Metashape (or whichever program you use) import and edit, then create the mosaic in OV.

Hi, I can think of a few possible reasons: 1. If you are using a textured model, confirm your model looks great before the video and that it isn't just a low quality texture issue. (I assume this you have already done) 2. Maximize the screen space before creating the video. If you screen size is small and then you try 'blow it up' to full screen to view the video, the scaling will add the blurred effect. 3. Change your framerate and resolution that you are using to record the video and see if it makes any difference? 4. If all else fails, feel free to send me some screenshots or a screen recording via email and I'll take a look for you. geospatialtips@gmail.com

Hi Dennis - you are correct. In this case the best fit makes the most sense (unless you had a custom base from before the pile was there). The mean plane would mean you lose a bit of material and the volume you get would be off. I'm not sure if you have watched this video, but I explain the differences between each plane type in a little more depth, maybe it'll help you. ua-cam.com/video/9t-EJBVqgLE/v-deo.html

Hi - I'm not 100% sure, but this link makes it look like you can, with some adjustment. Maybe worth taking a look. support.dronesmadeeasy.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/15327269268884-Mavic-3T-Thermal

Hi - go to 'Model' then 'Show/Hide Items' and then you should be able to hide these elements there. If you are still have trouble please send some screenshots to geospatialtips@gmail.com and I'll take a look for you.

Hi - it has been renamed "Build Point Cloud" and is a little further down the list than it used to be. It performs the same function however.

@@geospatialtips i had the same problem as @josephagouze3770. I was able to generate the dense point cloud following your instructions, but now the "filter by confidence" is and remains greyed out. Any idea what to do?

Hi - yes, when you create the point cloud, select the Advanced option and there will be a check box you need to enable that allows you to calculate the point confidence. I suspect this was turned off for you.

@@geospatialtips thank you very much

I'm having the exact same problem. No more Dense Point Cloud in v 2.1.2

Hi - it's just called "Build Point Cloud" now, but it does the same job.

Awesome, thank you!

Glad you think so!

Working on it!