Dear Community,
I have a bigger project of ca 22 000 images (1.9 TB) which I am trying to process into one orthomosaic and digital surface model (DSM). I split up the project into 12 subsets using Pix4D with ca 2000 images in each subset. Then my workflow was:
Do initial processing with all subsets
Merge projects:
Add Manual Tie Points (MTP) in Project A
Add the same MTP in Project B (name them the same)
Reoptimize in each project
Create new project with the option “Project Merged from Existing Projects”
Choose to treat objects with the same name as he same
Click finish
Reoptimize
Further Processes
I tried to merge 5 of the subsets and run all steps and when I started to inspect the dense point cloud I realized there are some problems. Sometimes at the border between the subsets there is a misalignment and a gap in the pointcloud:
I guess this misalignment will cause artefacts in the DSM and since my goal is to to DSM analysis I would like the DSM to have as high accuracy as possible.
Any ideas what can be the problem here and how can I solve it?
Are the images taken in sun too different from the ones taken under cloudy conditions?
Would it help to add more MTP in the errorous areas?
Should I better perform all steps on each subset and then merge them in another program?
Btw I cannot provide a quality report because Pix4D crashes every time I try.
22000 images! wow! Very challenging! Maybe you want to give it a try with our new product Pix4Dmatic that is optimized for very large projects. It is possible that Pix4Dmatic processes it in one project.
Regarding Pix4Dmapper, adding more common manual tie points (MTPs) especially in the areas with different light conditions will definitely help.
Here you can see how MTPs helped with a different light conditions dataset:
Also, merging 2 projects at a time is recommended (instead of merging 3 or more projects at a time)
Guessing your errors come from reflections due to sunlight. I find that sundlight (especially a strong, but low sun) make a lot more noise in the pointcloud.
However I, probably like you, don’t have the luxury to choose when to fly. Generally I find that the actual gound is at the same hight, so you just have to remove unwanted noise. This is ofcourse rather a pain for you with that amount of data. I wish there was a tool for selecting an area, thell the program that this is a mostly flat or uniform hight/incline area, and have it remove the worst noise.
I don’t think Pix4Dmatic will slove the noise issue, as it does that same as Pix4Dmapper. The issue is in the limitations of the software as it needs similar lighting conditions.
in the attachment you find the quality report of two merged subsets with MTP added to the road part. In the preview there seem to be a lot of noise as described in the link you sent. And there is also a clear line artefact along the edge between the subsets:
So adding MTP to noisy or errorous areas doesnt seem to help so much and would be very time consuming if I have to do it for all subsets.
Any processing options I could change maybe?
Why don’t you change how you split the projects? Splitting by flight results in different radiometry on adjacent projects which is giving you the problems when merging. Try the opposite approach. Use half of the images from two adjacent flights in a single project. Try to split the projects within the same flight so the radiometry at the adjoining edges is the same.
Pix4DMapper may be able to handle the large radiometric variability better within a single project as opposed to across projects.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems.
They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences,
logging in, or filling in forms. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site.
They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site.
All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous.
If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partner (Google).
They may be used by Google to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites.
They do not directly store personal information but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device.
If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.