Matterport no longer have skilled support staff to stitch models together.10231
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
| How is it possible that Matterport can no longer stitch together two models? They were able to do this in the past. It cannot be that difficult, they are just choosing to not support something that someone obviously could do in the past. This is a technique that you are able to do in other 3d software Is it another money pinching thing where they will earn more money because they host 2 models instead of one?? I would be happy to pay for the service. Telling me I can link the models together is not a solution. I believe the support person has no clue, as this is the sentence I received when I asked to have the models stitched."Please use Mattertag posts to link together" What is a post? This tells me that they have been told to say this. The matterport camera and the software is fantastic. The people which is the essential glue, the trust part, cannot be trusted. |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 WGANStandard Member Bon Secour, Alabama |
Chemistrydoc private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert They would rather roll out smart phone capture than service the needs of those of us who plunked down $3.5K for a camera. My $0.02 |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN StandardMember Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
They seem to like altering the deal. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert This was possible when (Super) Dee Johnson worked there. Perhaps no one else has her knowledge/skill set? I'm not exactly sure what happened with Dee and Matterport! Was there a falling out? Was it a mutual separation? Inquiring minds want to know! |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @VTLV Thank you for making my day. Has anyone got the email for the Matterport's Darth Vader I would love to send this to him. | ||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
@Queen_City_3D Yes that is true, apparently she got tired of their cow stuff. That is why I know it can be done, she did it for me many times. Just want the people from Matterport to know how I feel about them.  |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Standard Member Bon Secour, Alabama |
Chemistrydoc private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert It's as if they are saying to you (us): "We could do this if we wanted to. We don't want to. Sell your clients on an inferior presentation. Go away." KF |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
coulee360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Chemistrydoc, that was my thought. They'd rather flood the market with smartphone capture/3rd party 360 cameras to get more customers for themselves and also flooding the market with an inferior product that will ultimately bring their value down and competition to up their game and create a better product. All the well of giving all previous(current) customers and MSP's the middle finger pretty much saying we aren't important anymore. |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
Penebel IDN |
WayanMatt private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by leonherbert THIS IS BASICALLY the THING WITHOUT ANY DOUBT |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| We've only done 1 big project (approx 80,000 sqft). This gig was just right before Dee left and as I knew it was possible to stitch models together we made model copies along the way in case stitching was necessary. I was then panicked when I found out they quit offering that support. Fortunately, the model ended up processing in its entirety so I feel we got lucky on that one. |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
tejas_mithapelli private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I am facing an issue at present which is purely a processing error. I did this small space with no alignment errors all went super smooth but to our surprise the processed model is a disaster & no response from the support team so far. Here's what happened - I had scanned this space with no alignment issues. However the processed model shows a missing floor 3 & the scans of this floor 3 have merged with the scans of floor 4. Can this be corrected anyhow or is there a smart way to work around this. I've shared the screenshots of my capture app where I never got any alignment errors during the scanning. Also here's a link to the space - https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=gCiakY3XqLu Wondering if any of you faced such an issue & what could be the possibilities of delivering this to a client in the most effective way.     |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
Gerhard private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert We have been told in another feed on here that stitching will be possible but can take between 2 - 4 weeks. If this is not possible I am loosing out on 141 contracts that need to be fulfilled in the next 4 months, massive spaces. It is all about the user experience and they are going to fail if they do not provide this. You will confuse people jumping from one tour to the next. We will have to look at an alternative solution for this. time = money . I don't mind paying an extra $20 - $50 to get tours stitched, as we charge our clients a premium for the solution and they expect what we show them we can deliver. This just closes a big chunk of my market, as we do not focus on real estate as that is not where the money is and agents don't want to pay nevermind to have a cheap DIY solution, why because they are lazy. | ||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @tejas_mithapelli Sometimes Matterport will separate a floor into two floors because of a change in angle that to the software indicates that it is another floor. Perhaps it did the opposite. Is there a big change between the floors in altitude or is very minor. We the users have no control of this. So even if you have clearly defined separate floors, it may divide it further. | ||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Gerhard I think Matterport has no interest in hosting large interesting tours. They are more interested in bulk. They want every tom, dick and Harry taking sub par images with a cell phone and placing these low data intensive models on the web. Since we pay per model they make more money if we scan residential properties by the thousands instead of scanning public facing buildings that are going to be on the web for a long time. They are definitely taking the path of least resistance, that suits their pockets the most. I hope I can still continue to make a living from this. Hulle is net vol kak. |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert To answer your question about "Mattertag Posts", click here. clickable text | ||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @leonherbert I understand the frustration in waiting on the backlog. All I can offer is some transparency in hopes it clears up some of the misconceptions on this thread. There are approximately 150 stitching jobs in backlog at the moment with 1 full time and three part-time (hold other responsibilities) working very hard at taking down the list. There are three more full-time hires in the works. In addition, the Company is building software which will automate key parts of the process over time which will help considerably but this is out a quarter or two. As you can surmise from this investment that is underway, Matterport is committed to operationalizing stitching as a service that can be counted on at scale. I would expect to hear more about this in the future, but for now, all hands are on deck dealing with backlog in the wake of Dee's departure. dit is nie mooi nie. |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
tejas_mithapelli private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jwbuckl Thanks for the clarification. I'd appreciate if such acknowledgments to our problems are more quick and prompt than now. My support 5icket was answered after 2 days while my calls weren't answered as well. The model I scanned is just 137 scans very smaller one compared to rest with no special architecture, all floors being equal in height and length. Just a simple 3 storey building. I really hope you can get this fixed ASAP, as slicing such a small space into 4 models and connecting through mattertags would be a very poor execution of such a fantastic technology. Also would take a toll on both our reputations - Matterport as well as the MSP individual. Making it further more difficult for clients to count on us as well as to get new business. As in today such things are very quick to spread and share. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @tejas_mithapelli 137 scans is certainly on the smaller side compared to some of the monster models that others have discovered iPad limitations with. I'm curious why you chose to break this model up? Couldn't you connect the 3 stories through a staircase? |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
Cincinnati, OH |
leonherbert private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jwbuckl the assistance I got was the models are too big, there was not even an attempt to say they would try to stitch them. I am now in a situation with Northern Kentucky University where I will not be able to produce what I promised I would. They suggested the post technique, I must say I either forgot or it is new terminology for me for joining models using mattertags. I am well aware of this technique. This is not elegant at all. I have a five storey building that I am now going to have to join with posts. How does one even use the dollhouse view, two instead of one. I also want to publish to google street view, how am I to publish that since they are two models on top of each other. Perhaps you can find out for us, what size of model is too big to merge? What is the max number of points they are able to merge. |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
tejas_mithapelli private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Queen_City_3D I didn't break the model and neither do I intend to. It's a simple 3 storey building with regular stairs there's a processing error I guess which I firmly believe could be repaired by Matterport. The floor 3 has merged with the floor 4 creating an empty floor 3 in the dollhouse I've been doing this for more than 5 years never saw such a thing. There were no alignment errors as well while scanning which could have cautioned us. Have a look at this link you'll get it - https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=gCiakY3XqLu |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @tejas_mithapelli I sure wish there was a vertical trim feature for situations like your staircase leading up the floor above that wasn't scanned. That would clean it up. I see what you mean about the missing floor. Did you scan that missing floor and it simply didn't appear in the finished model? |
||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
tejas_mithapelli private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Queen_City_3D Yes I did scan that missing floor and it disappeared and got merged with the floor above. So if you see the processed model carefully the last floor has scans of both the floors. Really hoping they get this repaired. It would be shame to loose reputation and fail on my commitments at such a simple job. |
||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
|
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @tejas_mithapelli crazy... never seen that before. Did you try making some subtle changes on the iPad and changing the floor on there and reuploading? It will reprocess at no additional cost to you. |
||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
tejas_mithapelli private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Queen_City_3D You won't believe bro but I tried so many permutation combinations and reprocessed this model for a record no. of times. I've never felt this helpless in my career before. | ||
| Post 24 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Gerhard private msg quote post Address this user | |
@leonherbert  I have done very large school models and Dee stitched them for me within two days. So I know why they have a backlog now. We are busy negotiating a contract for 2000 scans per month for 48 months for a client in the middle east. So how is support going to handle this backlog? Have to look at a new solution very soon. As this is getting ridiculous. And also the hosting costs, when are we self-hosting? Oh no we are stuck in this ecosystem for life. Hearing stories for 5 years now. Feeling bad for guys still buying cameras. And still, their salespeople out of London is calling my clients. WHY ???? WHY ??? We built your company and not the other way around so start respecting us. But don't worry painted the picture to a very big client today, what happens if I die or jump ship your tours goes away forever. |
||
| Post 25 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Standard Member Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
That's a tough one. You clearly see the scans in nearly identical spaces for floors 3 and 4. Staircase gets blown out from the sun (on floor 3 maybe) and now you have a 4 week wait going on for something Dee could prioritize spin around in a day or so.  We have some "Partners" willing to pay a fee on top of hosting 2 models plus a stitching fee to host large models. Then we have legitimate issues like the one @tejas_mithapelli shares with an obvious need for attention getting zero response from his support ticket. Followed by a shove on MOUG and now coming here for help. I appreciate @Jwbuckl coming here to share the backstory as SuperDee cannot simply cannot be replaced. Currently looking at 4 people to do what she was managing. What a poor choice to let her go. Looking forward to the "Where is Dee Johnson" interview on Tuesday for some piece of mind. Frustrating to pay a company large sums of month over the past 4 years. Now knowing a 500% price hike is lingering out there with an inability to support the loyal "Partners" that continue to pay into the system. As Lando mentions in the above video; "This deal is getting worse all the time" |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN FanClub Member Queensland, Australia |
Wingman private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by leonherbert You can try to do it with pano2VR. Publish each model to GSV, then download all 360 into pano2VR from all models at once into a new Pano2VR project. After that find ends of each model and link them together and republish all 360 to Google. If you have access to local guides connect street view board I have explained joining multiple models there in more details https://www.localguidesconnect.com/t5/Street-View-Discussion/Virtual-tour-of-Big-area-with-no-concrete-maps-business-page/m-p/2003043#M37982 BTW, that is a good way to get all hi res 360 from Matterport tour without any hacking and risking being suspended from MSP. It costs to pay Matterport for publishing to GSV but it is worth it. You can use them to build a custom self hosted tour from them using Pano2VR. For example you can use a Matterport camera to capture hi-res quality scans, publish to GSV, then get all 360 from Google for virtual staging and present it as a virtually staged self hosted tour. I am going to use it soon with my new client as they need their apartment tours virtually staged. Since there will be no use for a dollhouse view in their Pano2VR tour I am going to do as less scans as possible to build a Matterport model, push it to GSV and get all panoramas from there into Pano2VR. The idea behind it is to get a 360 quality of a Pro2 and help my client to pay less for staging each tour. |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
|
Penebel IDN |
WayanMatt private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @wingman .... this is a great and so obvious idea ... (why didn't we thinks about it before ? ) thanks for sharing, as this is the only solution to provide a quality "fully immersive experience" and avoiding this stupid advise to play with mattertags, which basically is not what clients want ! you're a legend |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Fan Club Member Queensland, Australia |
Wingman private msg quote post Address this user | |
| you are welcome but remember it will only work on Google Maps. Your Matterport models will stay disconnected. Also be careful with floor allocations. That was not a problem with my case as I had a few big matterport models with all floors that needed to be joined with an outdoor path done with a Theta V. Plus if you read my post on localguides connect you have probably noticed it is not an easy task when you have a few models to join together and they have 1000s of panos in total. Pano2VR will be slow and buggy with this amount. They all need to be loaded from Google Street to your PC into a new Pano2VR project in order to join tours together and they will take a lot of computer resources to handle this amount. If you load just ending panos from each tour that needed to be joined together you will lose all other links. I believe though that Pano2VR developers can make it super easier if they add some checkbox and a code in their publishing tool that will tell Google to add new links and left intact all other existing links. That way you can just find ends for each tour, load only them into Pano2VR link them and only this new link will be added and nothing existing will be overwritten. |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
@leonherbert Quote:Originally Posted by leonherbert Please stand by while I learn this myself and then will share. |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?