Compare Matterport Pro1 Camera and GeoCV4764
Pages:
1
|
Max_Sodomovskiy private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Matterport: https://my.matterport.com/show/?m=uBVdLBtAXyV GeoCV: https://models.geocv.com/view/kopzz/ Do you have to buy a new Matterport Pro2 Camera or wait for the GeoCV? |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
Gibbsboro, NJ |
Radie842 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| When is it available and what's the price point | ||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| GeoCV uses 2K panos. It's comparable to the Pro1. I think that GeoCV is in a unique position to offer a different business model than Matterport in order to compete. This depends on: #1) Does GeoCV violate any Matterport Copyrights, or is viable as a product? #2) Will it charge monthly service fees, or will it offer self-hosting options? #3) What will processing cost, or will it offload this to desktop software? GeoCV -can- succeed if it does things differently. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
PedroAvilez private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I believe that competition is always a good market drive if it is done according with market rules. Metroplex questions make sense, specialy for service providers as most of us. The sample is very impressive but if someone wants to evaluate the Geovc product, issues as the business model behind the offer is a critical issue among many others. | ||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
 PremiumMember North Palm Beach, FL |
hometakes private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I few things short of Matterport but very very good. Looks like you don't need a Special Camera as the video from their website looks like the 3D part is done with an iPad. Of course, you still need a pano lens. You can't use your up/down keys to navigate in the embedded version (which they will need to fix for easy navigation). Also, doesn't have floor change ability. What I don't get is that it doesn't appear to show how we can buy it. Only booking tours themselves....... |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
Hartland, Wisconsin |
htimsabbub23 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| LOVE LOVE LOVE the floor plan view with dimensions and labels. Best use of a floor plan I have seen other than what 3D MP2FP does. They are amazing by the way if you guys haven't tried them! | ||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
 GeoCVCo-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Metroplex360 We have 4K version as well, but not all the computers can handle it. Matterport 4K viewer also crashes on my machine. We're also experimenting with post-processing filters, will share an alternative version soon. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 That's should be decided by an independent third-party, but from my perspective, both of our viewing solutions are similar to Google Maps (Streetview plus 3D terrain view), which is similar to other solutions. We use a different scanning setup and we have proprietary software for processing. Matterport was unique for real estate marketing but similar scanning solutions based on different sensors and similar approaches for stitching have been used for quite a while in professional laser scanning. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 As we're currently still polishing our solution in-house, we didn't finalize the business model and the feedback from the community of professional service providers could really help us come up with the best terms beneficial to you and still profitable to us. The current idea is to have a one-time processing fee and additional hosting fees only for long-term hosting (like more than 6 or 12 months), so you don't need subscription just for hosting. Moreover, the feedback we've got from the pros so far was that it would be great if upon your choice we could bill your customers for additional hosting rather than require them to depend on you. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 In contrast to Matterport we don't plan to make money on hardware but on the software. Processing in the cloud brings a lot of benefits to all the parties - you always get the latest robust software running on powerful machines with a one-button interface, and we don't need to support multiple versions, OS and so on. So it's likely that there would be a processing fee. We would really appreciate your ideas on what the best sustainable business model should look like for the best 3D virtual tour solution. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by hometakes Thanks for the tip! Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes We have such a feature in our short-term product roadmap, as well as some common and unique features coming soon, so stay tuned. Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes We are starting a closed beta program for service providers later this year. Meanwhile, we're making sure that the solution is ready enough for you to try it and love it. |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
Viewing private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYakubenko congratulations on such a neat product. Can you please clarify whether Geocv takes the order directly from the client and passes on work to the local Geocv provider (same as Matterport's program) or 3D pros use their own equipment and take their own orders but use Geocv to process the tour? Do you sell your own camera or can any 3D camera be used? I'm quite confused by it all but the finished product looks great. |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
Lincoln, NB |
PointCloudVR private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by AntonYakubenkoWe are very excited to see what the final product looks like. We'd love to know if or when we could apply for the beta. Cheers, Aaron @pointcloudvr |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
Premium Member North Palm Beach, FL |
hometakes private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYakubenko Thank you for addressing these points. You are off to a good start as you not only answer our questions here, but you are easily accessible and quick to answer. You are also asking your potential customers (us) as to our needs and appears that you want to understand us. Our needs? Good question. I don't know how long you have been a member of this forum but these needs could easily be addressed and addressing them will certainly attract a lot of clients from Matterport. We all screamed at Matterports IN YOU FACE branding when they changed the position of their logo link from discreet, to in your face. It caused an uproar to which they ignored. So a good tip, take yours away from being in your face at the top of the page and put it where Matterport use to be, where the '?' is. An idea where to put your powered by "GEOCV" would be at the bottom of the Instructions. Next, hosting. This is a huge contention. I would say all of us want to host our own tours so that they never expire. We also feel protected for our past assets should your company go out of business. We feel [upset] with these hosting fees. Of course, you have to make money. Do away with monthly minimum processing fees. If you have to charge more for processing to make up for the lack of hosting fees then do that. You could tier the processing fees on a yearly basis. IE. $70 for the first tour, then $65, then $60 all the way down to $20 per tour. You will have so many people jump ship from Matterport. Its not nice when a company has your $@lls in their hands and they are squeezing them tight. Thats what so many people feel in the Matterport community. It Seems you have activated the arrow keys for movement on embedded versions, wow, that was quick. It Works better on Chrome than on Safari. Safari gives me the warning noise when I hit the key although it does move the tour. I guess that needs tweaking. Dont target Realtors in your marketing. You are pitting them against us tour providers. How long does it take to shoot a 2000 square feet home? More questions to come...... |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Baxter We'll be rolling out step-by-step: 1. Feel ourselves in the service provider's skin by providing service by ourselfes in New York while polishing our tech. 2. Offer our solution to a few professional service providers in an early adopter beta program, get feedback, iterate on product development to deliver the most desired product. 3. Onboard more service providers, which are eager to build their own business using our solution, i.e. acquire and retain customers by themselves. 4. In parallel to 3 attract customers by ourselves and use a network of service providers to serve them acting in a more convenient and automated fashion for all the parties (customer and service provider). Quote: Originally Posted by Baxter We're using off-the-shelf smartphones with 3D cameras for capturing, so you'll need to buy one, as well as a couple of smaller pieces of equipment TBD. Currently there is only a single model supported - Lenovo Phab 2 Pro based on Google Tango, but more are coming. Quote: Originally Posted by Baxter Thanks  |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by PointCloudVR Sure, we keep track of everyone interested and keep you updated. |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by hometakes I'm reading the forum and though being the CEO of GeoCV I try to do many of our shoots by myself for now to really feel myself in the customer's skin. Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes Thanks for the tip. Of course, any solution provider wants his logo to be visible, but we'll try to keep a good balance between such a visibility an being too screaming. We'd also like to put service provider credits close to "Powered by GeoCV". And what do you think about white-label solution for an additional charge (as white-labeling decreases the potential inbound customers for us)? Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes We've heard such feedback quite a few times and would like to better understand all the nuances. Would appreciate your vision. - Where would you like to host the tour in case of self-hosting? - How would you guarantee the accessiblity of the tours and their good loading speed? We're using AWS (Amazon Cloud) for hosting and have a highly-skilled team keeping an eye on it. - Our 3D viewer is and would be constantly updating. Supporting such updates with remote hosting could require you to update the viewer code and the assests on your local hosting. Any thoughts on this? - If you won't require full subscription just for hosting your tours but could pay for additional hosting time per each individual tour? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of customers in real estate sales won't require a tour to be hosted more than a few months. It's different for multi-family rentals, businesses and hospitality, of course. - If you could pass the obligation to pay for additional tour hosting to your client would this solve the problem? I know that these are many questions, so would really appreciate even short anwers. Thank you! Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes Good idea, thanks. I totally agree that paying for more than you're actually using without rollover the unused tours to the next month is not customer oriented. It also doesn't take into account the seasonality of our business. Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes Thanks, we'll take a deeper look. I wonder, do you use arrows a lot? And do you see your customers or consumers using arrows a lot? Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes When we're talking to real estate agents in New York most of them prefer a service rather than DIY product, even if it's affordable and easy-to-use. I would appreciate your experience on this in other areas. Anyway, there would be always those who want to save time and effort and order the service, and the ones who want to save money and have time and effort capacity. If we won't target the latter group someone else will, I don't believe in articial barriers. So in my opition, it's better for all of us to find a way to provide additional value to motivate agents and brokerages come to service providers. 2.5% of listings for sales have Matterport tours. Data varies, but perhaps 15% of listing have professional photos. So I guess our main competition are not realtors using Matterport by themselves but 85%+ of agents not using anything niether by pros, nor by themselves. I truly believe that having 3D tours, great photos, floor plans and eventually VR/AR xperiences would benefit everyone in the industry - homebuyers and tenants, sellers and landlords, sellers' and buyers' agents and brokerages, listing portals and even guys in adjacent brick-and-mortar industries like property insurance, interior design and even moving. Our vision is to make high-quality visuals production a standard for almost each listing, not only a feature for luxury ones. Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes The process is being changed, so the shooting time changes as well. I'd say 2 hours to be safe. At least in the beginning the capturing speed won't be faster than Matterport. We see ways to improve on this in the longer term. I understand that decreasing capturing time to the minimum is crucial. But I wonder, what is the reasonable desired capturing time per 1000 sqft? In our experience, given the commute time, time on-site at least for minimal staging, necessity take additional shots for photos (we extract them from panoramas, but to make really good composition for photos it's usually better to reduce the tripod height and shoot from spots like corners, which are useless for the walkthrough) reducing capturing time under certain limit might not be that impactful. But of course, it should be decreased in comparison to the current state. Quote: Originally Posted by hometakes Looking forward to it! |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko Suggestion: Post this on the website homepage for clarity's sake. Quote: Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko It's the capture and processing vs. Matterport's patents that concerns me. Quote: Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko I'm going to assume that you're not implying that Matterport is a Real Estate camera and that that was an example. It's multipurpose, as your device will be. What are examples of similar approaches to stitching that has a Matterport-like or a GeoCV like end product? I know of none. iGuide, for instance, is different, as it simply creates traditional panoramic tours and uses LIDAR to build a map, position the panos on the map, etc. Quote: Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko I agree 100%. Quote: Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko I agree 100% with the answer in your question. Self hosting is overrated and has it's own disadvantages. Very few of us are capable of providing a proper CDN and those who are advocating for self hosting are being a bit short sighted and possibly trying to save a buck. I'm pretty sure that if self hosting were allowed, people would start complaining that the tours are not performing as they expected. Quote: Originally Posted by AntonYakubenko Using a combination of mouse + keyboard for demonstrating the product is powerful -- even if a client might only use the mouse or touch interface. -- I think that at the end of the day in reading all of this, my thoughts are: #1) What you are doing is impressive, but it seems to be building a business that walks, talks and quacks like Matterport. #2) Differences seem to be that the capture device would be a Project Tango phone - although I'm surprised that a Lenovo Phab is capable of high quality imagery. #3) Many of the intentions of GeoCV that line up with Matterport somewhat validates Matterport's business model which many of the forum members are critical of. Therefore, I see two scenarios: #1) People having the same complaints. #2) People not complaining about either product's business models because of the existence of a choice in platforms that generate 3D tours - thus no longer feeling that they 'have no choice' but instead 'made a choice.' -- @Anton, Thank you for coming to WGA to discuss your product with us and taking the time to answer everyone's questions. I have one more. But what does GeoCV mean? What is someone supposed to think when they hear the term? How does it work in a sentence? What is the end product called? I notice on geocv.com that the product (the tour itself) is simply called a '3D Virtual Tour'. With iGuide, it's called an 'iGuide'. With Matterport - it's called a Matterport Space. |
||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Viewing private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYakubenko Thanks for the info. Everything you listed sounds very much like Matterport's approach, allowing 3D pros to go get their own work but also being passed work from yourselves. It seems to be working for Matterport so why reinvent the business model wheel I guess. But it does lead me to agree with @Metroplex360 in that a duplicate of Matterport's approach means that using Matterport would become a choice so nobody could really complain. Where I think you'll ultimately succeed is that you engage with the community here and people appreciate that. Kudos. |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Thanks, sure, will be updating the site soon. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Matterport capturing is principally similar to any laser scanner - rotating range finder, just the sensor is different. Processing (stitching 3D scans) is similar to stitching laser scans as well. Both these technologies have been on the market for years, the difference is in details and particular implementation (I'm simplifying this of course to stress the gist). We use different devices for capturing and have proprietary software for processing. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 It terms of stitching software, there is Autodesk ReCap and many others for 3D point cloud alignment and meshing used in professional laser scanning. In terms of visualization, there is Google Maps (also captured with 360+3D cameras/scanners). Agree that the combination of the particular capturing process combined with a particular look particularly for interior spaces of the 3D tour differs from others. But if you look at Google Maps - it's very similar but for outdoors - a 360+3D camera for capturing, 3D+panoramas for visualization, the same smooth transitions between panoramas and ability to change between 3D and 360 views. Details differ of course. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Not more than Samsung Galaxy vs. iPhone in my opinion. I guess even the fact that we're using a significantly less expensive off-the-shelf hardware (and not making money on it while it's 75% of Matterport business) for capturing is already a sufficient differentiator for a business. Add a different business model (will describe in a bit more details below), different look and customization opportunities for the viewer (work in progress) and more open approach to data accessibility (e.g. letting to download panoramas to remove the camera from a mirror and reupload them back to the 3D tour) gives you another company solving the same problem in its own way. Our initial idea was to use mobile devices with 3D cameras for handheld 3D capturing of interior spaces and providing only a 3D scan as a result. As our 3D scans were of a higher quality than Matterport's ones we thought it would be enough for viewpoint-free real estate visualization (and it's actually almost is for room-scale VR - you can try our "Smolenskiy" scan in VRChat using HTC Vive). It has appeared we were wrong - realtors wanted to see 100% photorealism and high visual quality of imagery for web 3D tours. That's why we needed eventually move to a solution with a combination of a 3D scan and panoramas. Before moving to it we've experimented with a bunch of other approaches to visualize the space (e.g. walk around a 3D scan, snap to a panorama when you stop) both with free-viewpoint navigation and photorealism, but they didn't look that good. What does it mean? It means that the current way of visualizing spaces given the contemporary hardware and advancement of software is perhaps a good balance for now. And we came to this conclusion independently via customer feedback. It's totally different from 1:1 replica like http://www.3dnest.cn Also, the hardware even very similar to Matterport might become 10x cheaper overnight: http://www.spar3d.com/news/hardware/nctech-made-small-500-3d-capture-device-vr/ (we didn't try that device yet) So our focus is on the software core technology, product features and sales. Only 3% of listings have any virtual tour at all. Data varies, but only around 15% of listings have pro-quality photos. So I believe instead of focusing on competition with Matterport for these 3% of customers we better focus on serving the rest 97% and some of those 3%. And we encourage service providers to join us in this journey to make 3D tours and high-quality visuals a standard, not only a luxury feature. It would lower our margins a bit, but it would grow our volumes multiple. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 Isn't using $500 off-the-shelf device instead of $4000+ camera a significant differentiator all alone? I believe the cameras used even in the new Matterport Pro2 camera are not better than the cameras used in Lenovo Phab 2 Pro. In terms of resolution, regular FOV (field of voew) 16-megapixel camera of a smartphone can produce higher-res images than a DSLR camera with a fish-eye lens (we've measured this). Everything else (HDR, brightness, contrast, white balance, saturation, sharpness, noise, etc.) is mostly software processing. Using a smartphone for capturing panoramas gives one a reserve of resolution even for 4K tiles (Lenovo resolution is around 70 pixels per 1 degree). Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 "Geo" comes from geoinformation, "CV" stands for computer vision. It's a legacy name and I do not exclude a scenario that we would change it eventually. Quote: Originally Posted by Metroplex360 We should come up with a name because "3D virtual tour" is usually associated with old-fashioned 360 tours. If you have any ideas on how to better name a 3D tour I would really appreciate them. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
GeoCV Co-Founder New York City |
AntonYakubenko private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Baxter Not exactly. First of all, if feels that Matterport doesn't market services to real estate agents that much, it's only a backup plan for those who are not eager to buy a camera, as well as organic traffic. Does Matterport actively call agents offering them your services, not their product? Please correct me if I'm wrong. Secondly, if I'm an agent willing to order a Matterport tour I need to fill in a form, my info would be sent to a few service providers, I get quotes (not immediately), I need to compare them and portfolio as well, I need to schedule a shoot. It's more like an older way of using a taxi. What we're building is more like Uber. We're not there yet, but for the agent, it would be a one-button solution - say listing address, its approximate size (number of rooms or sqft) and pick the desired time for the shoot for almost immediate booking. For service providers, it's not a weak lead generation tool (how many orders do you get referred by Matterport?), but a stream of paying customers and convenience like calendar syncing and automatic booking and billing. You can serve your own clientele on your own terms (e.g. providing more advanced packages at a higher price) and serve customers coming from us based on standardized packages and pricing in your spare time. We already see such a model working in some areas for real estate photography and general photography services. |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Viewing private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @AntonYakubenko I do agree with your approach regards a hands-off order facility for agent and provider. Please keep in mind though that a situation where EVERYTHING is automated could lead to complications when a job is not as described by the ordering party. What we've done here at Viewing is to create a worldwide central hub where the ordering party (agent or otherwise) can liaise directly with the provider to discuss, arrange and distribute a job with the ability to request edits or even make edits then re-distribute until happy with the final product. I'm not saying it's perfect but it's been built specifically for the 3D community. You may want to copy this approach and I'm happy to help because you seem like genuine guys and it has no effect on our business model. However, my help (which you may not want or need) only extends to you if you guarantee that providers retain 100% of the arranged fee and you make your money via hosting and processing. This makes sense in regards to long term market share. All in all I really like your approach and the term "people buy from people" was never more applicable than now. Keep doing what you're doing  |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?