Hi
I have just had a map published from images taken with map pilot pro and despite all images being crisp and clear with a good overlap the resultant mapped image is not up to standard and am wondering what has gone wrong and how best to resolve it. It seems that the stitching has become confused with the roofing pattern.
See
https://www.mapsmadeeasy.com/maps/detail/328be0016a8a4fdcac4e9a564067a8e6/
This was done with 85% overlap height was 98 feet and actual roof height 25 ft above ground..The drone flew along the building 8 times.
Your instincts are correct. The repeating semi reflective pattern on the roof is what caused the issue.
You might want to try it again during different lighting conditions to minimize some of the reflection and variability. Also, running it at a lower resolution might mask some of the weirdness. That would be free to try.
الرجاء تسجيل الدخول لترك تعليق.
Out of interest I re-submitted this project and used the classic workflow rather than DJI Specific and amazingly the end result was much better but still not perfect. Does make me wonder though if this is a better option for all mapping projects as it would seem the apparant xmp tags do little to help the workflow and just make it worse! See link to both versions below
Original using DJISpecific Workflow https://www.mapsmadeeasy.com/maps/public/328be0016a8a4fdcac4e9a564067a8e6/
Much better classic workflow
https://www.mapsmadeeasy.com/maps/public/0f2ce3f2d232499d8e20224f733e691d/
We are glad to hear that it turned out better when you reprocessed the data. Technically there isn't any difference between the processing with the DJI and Classic workflows. The difference is in how the images are transmitted to us and what options are available. The DJI workflow has the ability to check the XMP tags before they are uploaded to make sure there is no junk in there. This makes it so we can process that data at a lower cost to users.
The only difference between the two data sets is that one had an extra image. The first dataset had the ground reference image which usually make things more accurate. The absolute elevations are more accurate in the first but he reconstruction is worse.
The bigger problem here is that the roof which is the hard part to process needs more overlap. You planned the flight for 85% overlap, which is great, but the roof really only got 75% overlap since it is a quarter of the way up towards the camera's position.
This is where the Ground Offset feature comes in handy. You can say that you want 85% overlap at some level above ground. So then you would have flown at the same height but Map Pilot Pro would have adjusted the flight path to make sure the roof gets 85% overlap, not the ground.
