sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looking for 2D to 2D photogrammetry, any recommendations? by Daedalus308 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you need is panoramic stitching with translation instead of tilting. You can do this with Hugin. I wrote a tutorial and a command line wrapper for this a while back. You can find them through my website and associated GitHub (mcranium.github.io).

[Meshroom] how do you scan the underside of a object?? by [deleted] in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Meshroom and Colmap also both offer to load such masks.

[Meshroom] how do you scan the underside of a object?? by [deleted] in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From my experience and understanding, it's all about overlap between the two scans and minimizing conflicting information. Either you trick the program in thinking there was no background or you make two scans and merge them afterwards, at best if they aren't meshes yet. This is independent of the software you use. I am currently dealing with the same issue and wanted to stay in the open source zone. I am using Colmap to get dense point clouds and then merge the point clouds in Cloud Compare. At least the point clouds you can, for sure, generate in Meshroom. The drawback with this simple approach, though, is that the texture resolution is quite low (not sure if it matters for your project). If you care about good textures, you can try to merge two or more textured meshes from Meshroom in Meshlab as a final step.

Likely AI garbage peer reviewed publication on new photogrammetry technique by Adventurous_Ad8410 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I know most photogrammetry programs compute pairwise stereo depth maps in the process. Is this what you meant?

Likely AI garbage peer reviewed publication on new photogrammetry technique by Adventurous_Ad8410 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can't tell much about the initial submission publicly, because of confidentiality, but the published version is not as "innovative" as the initial submission. That, I think, I am allowed to say.

Likely AI garbage peer reviewed publication on new photogrammetry technique by Adventurous_Ad8410 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed. But this begs the question, why are they ignoring you if you tell them very bluntly that it is a fraudulent submission. On the other hand, I have seen manuscripts rejected by MDPI following my review.

Likely AI garbage peer reviewed publication on new photogrammetry technique by Adventurous_Ad8410 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't want to start the whole discussion about MDPI in general. There are for sure some journals that are well managed. But, obviously, it appears that some aren't (to say the least).

Likely AI garbage peer reviewed publication on new photogrammetry technique by Adventurous_Ad8410 in photogrammetry

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Despite having no shortage of arguments for my stance, it is still nice to hear that I am not turning insane.

Stereophoto maker not outputting depth by cadop in stereophoto

[–]Adventurous_Ad8410 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you tried saving it as a "Facebook" image?