360 Photo stitching errors1787
Pages:
1
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I've noticed over the last few months that I seem to be getting more visible errors, probably where the different photos making up the 360 panorama are joined. These sorts of errors have always been part of the Matterport experience, but I think they are getting worse. Is it just me? I wonder if my camera might be getting old and wobbly or something during the scan. I try to minimize these by using a bubble level and leveling each scan, and I also try to orient the starting position of the camera square with the main features of the view I'm scanning. |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
HarlanHambright private msg quote post Address this user | |
| do these occur more when you're close to something? | ||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Yes, definitely. I used to notice them mostly on things like railings and grids. But now I see them in doorways and kitchen counters, all over the place. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
CarlosFHdz private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @craigsauer , my team and I were talking about this issue this morning. I've also noticed a significant reduction in model alignment on the finished model, as well as, on the iPad while capturing. Almost like if they've increased the range for alignment paying for that by less accurate stitching. Another thing we've noticed is the quality of the images while touring in the model. Compared to the previous months, they're lacking in crispness. I reached out to matterport with one model asking about the alignment issues asking if there's an issue with my camera. They gave me the canned answer that I might have been too close to the railing. (Don't really have a choice going up stairs or in a small balcony) They said there's no self calibration test to find out if there's an issue with it. I figure there's a certain allowance for misalignments before its determined that the camera has an issue. We've put the old camera on hold and we've been using a much newer camera. In the next few days we'll have enough of a model sample to determine the difference from models with the new camera and models with the old camera to make a determination if sending the old camera to matterport is required. I'll update by Friday if there's a noticeable difference between our old camera and new camera. Carlos. |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Thanks, @CarlosFHdz! I've also noticed that there seems to be some issues with the Capture App as well. More rooms that don't perfectly align with adjacent rooms. I'm about to buy my second camera, so I'm very interested to hear if your newer camera is behaving differently. My guess is that Matterport has done something to decrease the processing time for the models. I'm definitely noticing the models are coming back from processing MUCH faster than they did a few months ago. Today I submitted a scan for about 2000 sq ft at 8 pm PST, and it came back complete less than 2 hours later. Maybe the quality reduction is related? I'm especially interested in this issue on my latest scan, because the agent wants to use still photos captured from my tour. I haven't had anyone ask for that since I started noticing so many more visual defects in the panoramas. I'm worried that I won't be able to get good still pictures without those visual defects. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
Hawaii360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Very interesting topic indeed. I'll keep following as I have a bunch of jobs coming up. | ||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
 3D RenderingsAEC Elevation Drawings Montreal, Québec |
ArchimedStudio private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I've noticed this too. The railings are getting ridiculously jagged. Some might say (and this is the answer I have to give to the clients that say the quality is not good) it is OK to have a few artifacts here and there. The technology is pretty advanced, the turnaround time is amazing. These artifacts do not prevent from getting a good sense of what the space looks like as if we were there. Of course I hope we'll get better and better image quality and stitching over time. In the meantime, we still have the best tool on the market!  Matt |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
CarlosFHdz private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I understand what you're saying Matt, but this is a step back in terms of quality. specially since Alignment has been better before. Speed of loading and navigation is important, but there's a limit on how much to cut quality for that, I think that limit has been passed. Carlos. |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
3D Renderings AEC Elevation Drawings Montreal, Québec |
ArchimedStudio private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Being a perfectionist myself, it's hard having no control on things like this. The only thing I can do is believe quality will get better, and reassure my clients. If I could stitch the photos myself to improve the quality, I would. I look forward to seeing if the new camera makes a difference. We might buy another one in the near future as well... Matt |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
ny360east private msg quote post Address this user | |
| very noticable in the spindals going up and down stairs. always looks way out of wack. I just figured it is what it is, and nothing we can do about it. whats this "new camera", @archimedstudio?? | ||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
CarlosFHdz private msg quote post Address this user | |
| The stitching has been better in the past. If you read the thread, I said, I have a newer camera (Same model, just purchased recently) and I wasn't sure if this issue was with my older camera wearing out and going out of alignment or a software issue. | ||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It occurred to me that maybe this is just an issue of economics. I had been assuming that Matterport's dramatically improved processing time for models over the last few monhts was a result of some fancy algorithmic improvement. But now I'm guessing that they decided they were paying Amazon (or whoever is doing their cloud computing for them) too much and decided to reduce quality somewhat to save processing time and thus cost. | ||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?