Photogrammetry

Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Dear All,

I have just bought a Vision+ for the primary purpose of making digital surface models of the geothermal areas I work in.

Just wondering what the advantage is (if any) in using a flat lens (e.g. Ragecams) versus correcting the image in Photoshop?

On a separate but related issue, I notice Pix4D considers fisheye images to be ideal for 3D modeling:

https://www.facebook.com/Pix4d/posts/10 ... eam_ref=10

Does anyone have any experience in making 3D models (digital surface models) using the Phantom Vision and Pix4D, Agisoft or similar software? If so what is your advice for a novice?

Cheers,
Mark
 
MikesTooLz said:
I would think something like this would be much better for your needs.

https://www.sensefly.com/home.html


Fly's autonomously so you don't have to be at the controls flying it. Creates 3D maps on its own.

and they are about the same price as the phantom 3 vision+.

MikesTooLz: I got two separate quotes on the eBee Ag version of the Sensefly model, and they were around $25,000. If you received way better quotes or looked into less expensive models, I'd love to hear.
 
Awesome program.
A little pricy to get as a toy but actually the price is not bad if you have real business need for it.

From what I can tell from their web page the lens does not matter much, I think the software takes into account that almost every lens ever made has some level of distortion.
So in that case I would guess that wider is better so that you don't have to take as many photos to get your subject fully covered.
The "flat lenses" are not nearly as wide angle.

I would love to play with that software some time. Very cool.
 
Cr8tive_leo said:
I love what was done here... been toying around with it too... Autodesk 123 catch.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vtj4P9oqsoM

Nice. Also found this software for free (non-commercial):

http://flightriot.com/tutorials/post-process-tutorials/

I hung a model car from a thread of cotton, and spun it gently while filming with my iPhone. I had a 3-D image of a Ferrari in about 1 hour so the software does work, and the principal is the same for making digital surface models.
 
fujitsuman said:
MikesTooLz said:
I would think something like this would be much better for your needs.

https://www.sensefly.com/home.html


Fly's autonomously so you don't have to be at the controls flying it. Creates 3D maps on its own.

and they are about the same price as the phantom 3 vision+.

MikesTooLz: I got two separate quotes on the eBee Ag version of the Sensefly model, and they were around $25,000. If you received way better quotes or looked into less expensive models, I'd love to hear.


Wow, never mind, I had tried finding pricing online, none of the sellers had pricing info available online however an article I read said $1300, thats way off.


Check this out http://ccwu.me/vsfm/
 
wharfbanger said:
Dear All,

I have just bought a Vision+ for the primary purpose of making digital surface models of the geothermal areas I work in.

Just wondering what the advantage is (if any) in using a flat lens (e.g. Ragecams) versus correcting the image in Photoshop?

On a separate but related issue, I notice Pix4D considers fisheye images to be ideal for 3D modeling:

https://www.facebook.com/Pix4d/posts/10 ... eam_ref=10

Does anyone have any experience in making 3D models (digital surface models) using the Phantom Vision and Pix4D, Agisoft or similar software? If so what is your advice for a novice?

Cheers,
Mark

Can you please tell me which software do you use for getting DEM? And one more important thing: how can you acquire each photo location (x,y,z) from phantom vision 2 plus? Some softwares (agisoft) need that information.
 
I (geomorphologist) have used Phantom vision + images within Agisoft Photoscan software for both 3d models and ortophotos. Phantom adds GPS coordinates by default to exif fields and Photoscan imports those automatically. I did some testing and got best results with slightly sharpened/color corrected (adobe Lightroom) etc images. Dont remove the fish-eye effect, it messes up with Photoscan as it tries to correct images by itself based to exif info.

I found one quite good general guide in the web: http://humadesign.org/photogrammetry-fo ... -part-one/
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,354
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic