The images below show a small area taken from a 25 acre flight. The same source images were submitted to four different photogrammetry services. What I'm particularly interested in here is how ReCap resolves the buildings differently than the other services. There are aspects of the ReCap point cloud that I like better than the others (fewer holes, no errant points significantly below ground level, adaptive point density?) but the way ReCap handles the buildings -- roofs especially -- is a little disappointing. Everything seems overly smoothed somehow.
Actually, I'm not convinced fewer holes is a benefit, but whatevs.
Aside from getting a better camera is there anything I can do in the submit and processing phases to improve the quality of the ReCap product?
Interesting that the images feel much more similar now that I look at them on their own. Flying around the point clouds in ReCap they each have more obviously distinct personalities.
Thanks for this interesting benchmark. Which camera did you use?
Would it be possible to access your source images so that we do our own tests?
Dominique Pouliquen, Autodesk, Reality Solutions.
Search the Autodesk Knowledge Network for more content.
New: Get an Activation Code
Mac OS X 10.12 Support
Windows 10 Support
Autodesk Online Store Help
Serial Numbers & Product Keys
Installation & Licensing
Online Activation & Registration
Network License Administration