I thought that by checking the window for "Process as Full 3d with textured vertical surfaces" I was able to get my model i 3d and with downloadable texture files.
But when I did not check the window for Full 3d before I proceed with my model, the model looks just the same as when I check that window. It was still 3d with textures. What is the different? Except that by checking that window my free model was not free anymore.
The model was 3d with downloadable texture and files in both cases!??
The difference between "Full 3D" and the normal model generation is that the full 3D option will render overhanging areas while the standard version will not. It takes significantly more processing resources to do that which is why we have the price multiplier.
The full 3D processing is only really recommended when non-nadir images are included in the data set to capture the areas under the overhangs better.
댓글을 남기려면 로그인하세요.
Thank you for answaring!
When it comes to non nadir images, is it possible to fly manually arond an object and take many non nadir images without using the maps made easy app? And then upload to maps made easy system? Or is it recomended to use the app for this and adjust camera angel manually?
And how accurate is the volum measuring tool?
Non-nadir images are ones that are taken while not looking straight down. Images taken at oblique angles are harder to manage the overlap for and are generally unsuitable for aerial mapping. Oblique images are required for accurate full 3D modeling where the detail of vertical or overhung surfaces would not be captured using nadir images.
Map Pilot can be used to capture non-nadir images by adjusting the camera gimbal angle up 45 degrees or so after the aircraft has left the point directly over the takeoff point. We recommend doing two missions over a 3D survey area that are 90 degrees opposed to be sure to capture information from all angles. You can also free fly if there is a smaller area of interest.
The volume measurements do not require the full 3D processing and are very accurate (within 1% of other tools) when measured on a flat surface. We are working to account for unknown base surfaces a little better.
Is it recomended to take non nadir photo for optimal volume measure?
Since the volume measurements do not take overhangs into account, it will not require the full 3D processing to get accurate results. For most objects that people typically need accurate volume measurements for like stockpiles and excavated cavities, the normal processing is sufficient.
