I'm working on getting a P4P set up with an Emlid Reach gnss receiver and have been doing a ton of reading about ppk processing. I have learned that a camera calibration is required for every unique camera in order to achieve the highest quality in the photogrammetry process. A profile for the entire camera line is not a substitute it seems.
Is there any plans to address this in MME's process in some way? An online utility would work for those with access to a flat screen tv or large monitor or maybe accepting some sort of profile from Photoscan Pro or Pix4d.
Thank you!
This is not something we are likely to address. Generally if a user is capable of using those softwares and has the need for such high precision they will be processing things on their own.
We do compute a camera calibration for every job that is uploaded to us. We do not just assume that all P4Ps are the same.
Iniciar sesión para dejar un comentario.
Don't sell MME processing short. I'm not an expert at using the software I mentioned having only used the trial periods. But a small test I did (with no GC) and compared with MME's results, MME's results were very good.
The cost for that software is very high if the volume of work does not justify it. So, MME's model works well for that. That doesn't mean that I don't want the highest accuracy I can get if I'm willing to put the effort in on my end.
Judging by a lot of the replies to questions and comments, I get the impression that the focus of the MME model is to deliver a product that's first priority is to be easy to use for beginners at the sacrifice of creating an accuracy ceiling that would be difficult or impossible to go past because it would add complexity to inputting project data? I can understand that if that is the demand you guys are looking to fill. That's kind of a bummer though for those wanting to go a notch higher.
Anyway, I guess it is good that some sort of calibration is done with each project even if the user has no idea how accurate it is or what is being done to derive the correction.
Thanks for the feedback and here's 1 vote for a MME Pro version.
