Видео

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. ruclips.net/video/9t-EJBVqgLE/видео.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 - 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?

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

Awesome, thank you!

also global mapper is not free

I never suggested Global Mapper was free. For Map Pilot Pro I was just pointing out that the free version is decent for folks new to the photogram world.

Yes, unfortunately this is the case. However, it seems that it's due to a DJI restriction, rather than a processing software limitation. Maybe one day they'll open it up...

Glad you liked it

Hi! Sorry I've been pretty quiet this year. It's been a bit of a challenging year so far, but things are looking up and I plan to add to the channel soon and hope it's of some value to you all! Thanks for checking in :)

@@geospatialtips Sorry to hear about the challenges and I hope everybody is okay. Glad to hear that things are looking up!

Yip, they did change it up. It is now called Build Point Cloud (or something like that) a little further down the same menu. But, it does the exact same thing.

@@geospatialtips Thanks! That's very useful. I don't know if the recent trends in software to just change menu items at will, voiding RUclips tutorials out there, is good or bad. I sure would have loved to ignore users back when I was stuck writing software that had user interfaces. But it still seems irresponsible to me! I suppose, with AI rising, it won't matter much.

Hi - no, I'm not Swiss, I am South African. I just happened to use a Swiss dataset for this video. I'm happy to help you if I can, you can email me at geospatialtips@gmail.com if you like.

And another question: is it possible to use the demo version of Abisoft Metashape Professional?

Hi - yes, you can definitely use the demo version to calculate volumes and do all other things.

Hi - thanks so much! Yes, you'll need t have the Pro version for volume calcs.

Thank you. But why does not everyone do it with the demo version which is free?

@@retobrugger3270 A few reasons I can think of: The demo is only free for 30 days, after that it won't work. Secondly, I believe the terms and conditions state that the demo cannot be used for any commercial work or financial gain, so technically it shouldn't be used for such things. Nothing physically stops you from doing so and continuing to use it, but those are some reasons, nonetheless.

Glad it was helpful!

Hi! No, you don't need to know any of that. The software will create the files you need and you would need to upload them to a server. At worst you may need to edit a couple lines in the HTML file, to make sure you are pointing to the data, but that's all.

​@@geospatialtipsThank you for the tips. 😊

Fantastic!

You are correct that 60/30 is all that is required for photogrammetric processing and this setting can be adjusted in the software. However, for better visual 3D modelling results, a higher percentage overlap will be needed.

Hi - I used Movavi Video Editor for this purpose.

I would just use the optimization. I think that if you re-run the alignment you "force" the images onto the control position and therefore deviate away from a true AT result. Thus, you can't report it as an accuracy value using those points because you're fixing them. If however you have many additional check points that you only add afterwards, then it should be okay.

Hi. This video was made with version 1.8. Currently I use 2.1 however.

Thanks for watching!

Hey TexasHunter Thanks for the kind comments. I use a desktop for the processing work, even though mine is pretty old now, it’s reliable in a way I don’t think laptops are if pushed hard over long periods. I think a good GPU with 8GB worth of memory and at least 64GB of RAM are where you want to be for most jobs. You can use lesser specs, but you may find processes start to fail. (More RAM would be great, 128GB and up) Your CPU will dictate the speed with which certain tasks run, but I can’t recall seeing smaller CPUs causing failures like small GPUs and low RAM would. Hope that helps a little.

@@geospatialtips that’s exactly the advice I was looking for. Thank you sir

Hey Dennis! Question: The 3713 value form Metashape, is that before or after aligning images? I expect it'll change a little after your first alignment step and this difference isn't outrageous. But, if this is the value that Metashape gives right after adding your data, then I am not sure what is happening as your maths is correct.

@@geospatialtips This is before I aligned the images. After aligning, the adjusted value is F= 3705.749. So, what I did was start a new project, upload images and then manually input F= 3713.29 as the initial. Not sure if this is correct but after aligning so far everything seems to be in an acceptable range. I just saw that you do one on one tutoring type sessions. Im interested in setting something up soon!

@@geospatialtips correction; the value I manually entered prior to aligning was the 3659.69.

@@geospatialtips Fumbling my words here trying to explain. Ill recap here quickly incase anyone else is having the same issue. After importing images I went into the Camera Calibration menu and noticed that it had a value already populated (3713.29). Then I calc'ed myself using the equation 12.29 (Mavic 3 Enterprise wide lens focal length) X pixel size .00335821 = 3,659.68. After attempting to align the images, I went back into the Camera Calibration menu and noticed that the value did not change to the correct length in micron (3,659.68). So I opened a new project and started over, this time after importing the images I went back to the menu and manually entered the calc'ed figure. Then I aligned the images and my adjusted value is F= 3705.74, and this is within the acceptable range! Im not sure why Metashape is giving the wrong calculation after adding the images.

Hi - yes, there is a solution for your situation. You'll want to setup your computer as a local server/node. This video will explain what you need to do: ruclips.net/video/BYRIC-qkZJ8/видео.html Using this technique I have processed 35000 images using a PC with about the same specs as yours, without the need to use chunks. All the best!

Thank you!

Thanks!

Hi. Thanks very much for the feedback and suggestions. I have tried to implement some of these already in later videos and I hope they are easier to follow than this one.

Hi - check the Metashape Preferences/Advanced tab and make sure the box is ticked to allow Metashape to read that kind of data on import. If it still is not there, right click on one of your images in File Explorer, go to Properties and then Details. Scroll down the list and make sure the coordinates are saved in the raw image data. If none of that helps you, maybe send me one of your images and I will take a look. (geospatiltips@gmail.com)

Yes, you can set it beforehand as well and use your desired system from the beginning. The process would be much the same.

Hi - check the Metashape Preferences/Advanced tab and make sure the box is ticked to allow Metashape to read that kind of data on import. If it still is not there, right click on one of your images in File Explorer, go to Properties and then Details. Scroll down the list and make sure the coordinates are saved in the raw image data. If none of that helps you, maybe send me one of your images and I will take a look. (geospatiltips@gmail.com)

Hi - it will depend on how accurate you need the end result to be. Also, is the drone you are using RTK enabled, or are you using just the onboard GPS? If only the onboard GPS it will be less accurate. Using this ortho is still possible, but you have no way of ensuring accuracy, so we get back to the question of, "How accurate do you need it to be?"

Hi - I have used the viewer many times, on different workstations, and the need to install electron is based on the workstation and what had been previously installed. So yes, sometimes I have had to install electron but this is not usually the case. For the online viewer you won't need electron and can post the package directly to the web server and it usually works quite easily.

@@geospatialtips thanks for the reply. Glad to know that was not an unusual scenario.