Where Are You Publish to Street View?5103
Pages:
1
|
LeventeSolczi private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Do You know about Matterport - Google Street View solution? I asked Matterport, they said: We will send you a mail about gsv using by myself... but there is no answer. I would like to put my modells on google street view, but i don't know how. I read a lot... but nothing. I am sorry but there are a lot of strange things about the futurama... so i had bad strand: like this: What if... Google SV workers (worldwide) get some MP pro2 cameras... and goooo like google street view  offer the MP solution. Just think about it: 2 in 1... would you like to be on GSV? yes... we can make it MP.... I just wondering about GSV "silence" and promises with no answers... |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Moving from a different discussion today.... Quote: Originally Posted by @justinv |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
TrustedPhotoDC private msg quote post Address this user | |
[Matterport writes today Tuesday, 25 July 2017] on publishing from the Matterport platform to GSV.   Issues lay on the Google team as the SV publishing API is buggy and should have never been released into the wild until there was parity with the deprecated editor. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
justinv private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod That is why the other day when you projected September, I said "that might be too soon"! I would rather them hold off and until they get it right. Who wants to go back and try to explain to a customer why it is buggy? |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @justinv Yes. When I predicted two months ago ... ✓ Matterport to Google Street View: Sept 2017? As part of my coverage of the Google Street View Summit in Tokyo (10-11 May 2017), it seemed obvious to me that Matterport advertising "this summer" [2017] was overly optimistic (because it was evident that Google API (beta at the time), was too buggy (based on my in-person discussions with CTO's of companies attending the Summit in Tokyo. [Noteworthy, as reported elsewhere in the We Get Around Network Forum, Matterport has removed all its home page references to Google Street View "This Summer" ... As I wrote, "And while Matterport's history of announcing delivery dates - and missing by as much as nearly a year in some cases, in this instance, I believe the delay will be caused by Google." "While Google is making reasonable effort to have its API exit beta testing by the end of Summer, I believe they will miss either because of something unexpected or features that Camera companies are requesting or simply debugging." So, yes. It seems obvious that Matterport will not be ready this summer with offering publish to Google Street View AND, I may have been too optimistic about saying, "September 2017" .... And, too bad about 2.5D experience - as reported above - not being ready at launch. This feature would have given Matterport Pros a huge leg up on creating Google Street View Tours by taking advantage of the depth data that the Matterport Camera captures. It's too bad that Matterport killed @Metroplex360 MP2SV service. We (all) could have been publishing to Google Street View with MP2SV until Matterport was ready to launch. (A missed opportunity for Matterport to have given the Community a head start on publishing Matterport Spaces to Google Street View. And, while you can export 360ºs from Matterport, my impression is that Matterport is NOT giving us the full, robust image. So, while their advertising claims X quality with Pro2; on the 360º export front, Pro2 owners do not get the full benefit of what the Camera has captured (and advertised). Perhaps some of the Pros that work intimately with Google Street View and Matterport can explain the Pro2 resolution captured versus the 360º exported. Best, Dan |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| "Currently we are examining instances where MP Spaces have scans at multiple heights..." There's a little meta tag that you add to the pano called 'altitude'. Matterport already stores this data for each pano - as well as already organizes into levels (floors). This could be added in a day, then tested and ready within a week. Easily. https://developers.google.com/streetview/publish/reference/rest/v1/photo#Pose "our developers have multiple projects to juggle..." This is kinda telling. It sounds to me like they don't have someone dedicated to this right now. -- If I worked for Matterport and was dedicated to the GSV Platform ... I'd likely be demotivated due to how frustrating GSV is. It's inferior to Showcase. The only thing that is useful is that panos display on Google Maps -- but even then, they aren't very visible. The value plummeted when Google decided to remove the 'See Inside' icon from place listings. Decisions like this are absolutely frustrating to GTPs (Google Trusted Photographers) and undoubtedly to platform developers like Matterport, GoThru, PanoSkin, etc. Their job is to professionally make lemonade out of the lemons they've been given. GSV is an EXCITING term and people are interested in it -- but as a platform, it could be -SO MUCH BETTER-. -- One more thing .... 360 Snapshots are < the Google Trusted resolution requirements. They should not be posted. If Matterport allowed all panos to be exported and simply added positioning meta data relative to the Google Place ID GeoCoordinates (where you verify the address -- Matterport save this information) -- you could upload them to GoThru.co and moderate the connections there and then publish quite easily. -- Love the Matterport Developers... Showcase is a work of art in my opinion. I cannot understand the hold up on GSV. |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?