Post

2 followers Follow
0
Avatar

Full 3D processing - poor 3D results

Hi MME,

I recently flew a double grid mission with 85/85 overlap at 150' AGL, and slight upward gimbal tilt over a freestanding building in an open field. Old Ranch 1.

Unfortunately, the building did not render well.  The peak of the roof wasn't identified correctly, and resulted in a seriously squished building.  The model is unusable for my purposes.

I used the Full 3D processing option, and only one image of 198 was dropped.  

My building actually looks fairly similar to the one you use as an example on the Full 3D vs 2.5D article, so I'm even more surprised that the processing produced such poor results in this case.

Can you help me to understand what was the limiting factor(s)?  And, is there anything I can do to clean up or color-correct my images before re-processing that would produce better results.

Thanks for any insights.

-Nick Wagner

n.wagner124@gmail.com

N Wagner124

Official comment

Avatar

Sorry for the delay. Metal roofs are always hard to render well when they consist of repeating patterns and have reflections (even if they are minor).

Sometimes too much overlap is a bad thing. If you have one set of images from just half of the double grid that don't appear to have big differences in the reflective surface that might turn out better. Also, try running it as 2D. 

Tipping the gimbal up makes reflection differences worse...

You can do color correction before hand as long as you don't move any pixels around or modify the location tag data. 

Zane
Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

2 comments

0
Avatar

Hi MME,

 

Can you please provide some input to my request?

 

Thank you,

-Nick Wagner

N Wagner124 0 votes
Comment actions Permalink