Wish List: What to Clean Up in a 3D Showcase655
Pages:
1
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Requests for blurring and Photoshopping have come up several times in various Matterport User Group Forum threads such as for blurring faces and removing objects. I would like to provide Matterport with our "Wish List" for: 1. What we would want cleaned up in 3D Showcases (in addition to removing the camera in mirrors and blurring peoples' faces) 2. If we would prefer a 3rd party solution for doing this; or would we prefer to be able to do it yourself (For example, schematic floor plans in (coming soon) Matterport Showcase 2.0 are likely to be done by a 3rd party that is seamlessly integrated into 3D Workshop (my best guess) 3. If you are willing to pay for a 3rd party solution, how much do you think Matterport should charge and for what level of blurring or Photoshopping? 4. Other thoughts on blurring or Photoshopping? Plus, please "thumbs up" comments that you agree with. I plan to email this "Clean Up Wish List" to Matterport on Wednesday, 30 September 2015. Thanks, Dan |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
RealEstateReadines private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I am a Realtor and Matterport owner/user. I take the time to do all of my own shooting, so I understand how challenging the mirrors can be. When I first started using my Matterport, I would spend up to an hour trying to scan a bathroom without capturing the camera in the mirror. In the essence of time now, I have learned it just isn't worth fighting a couple of scans where the camera shows up in a mirror. Yes it is annoying, but the flow of the tour is more important than not getting a needed scan. Having a blur option will greatly speed up scanning with not having to worry about dodging any mirror. It will also make creating scans that move through a house flow better if we do not need to worry about placement. Matterport or 3rd party does not matter to me, whomever can create it as a simple quick tool that is easy to use. Given how I use the camera and that I am my own client, it is not a feature I am willing to pay for. It should come as part of the tools we use. Thanks Dan for all you do! |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Jamie private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I agree. Isn't there a legal requirement in the USA for blurring images (e.g. google street view?) | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
HarlanHambright private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I do HDR all the time and have figured out acceptable ways to deal with color temperature mismatches. Matterport favors the incandescent in a mixed lighting environment, which makes sense on average, however, there are several adjustments I perform in Photoshop which pleasantly mitigate the harsh blue we get from daylight sources in some interiors. I did a beach house last week with lots of window walls and interior lighting and was impressed how Matterport rendered the colors in general. A couple of captures however, where the interior lighting was prevalent but with some daylight visible could have been rendered with a bias toward the daylight making the inside warmer which is more acceptable to the eye than BLUE areas. Maybe color temperature could be averaged over a whole job rather than by each capture? But at the end of the day, I would rather have control over color rendition! | ||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi Dan, I would love for you to make these feature requests sticky. From what I've been presented on this site, you are one of the most outspoken members of the Matterport community both because you run this site and because, I assume, you communicate with Matterport directly and have an amicable relationship with them whereby they listen to you and have provided you with the opportunity to test new things. Thus, people like myself probably assume that this site would be a good place for a feature request thread that was sticky at the top. That all being said  --#1) Ability to Disable Dollhouse View I have a client who find the jagged edges and imperfections in the dollhouse view to be the dealbreaker about this technology for them. I'm quite disappointed but respect their viewpoint. This customization would be quite easy. #2) Ability to Disable Transitions Dan, I saw your post about the VR App Beta having a disable transitions option. I would also like to be able to disable transitions by default on the web app. Some clients do not like the neat transition effect as it adds a certain level of jagged imperfection. I have produced 1,000s of panoramas using a DSLR and I use a zoom in effect while cross-fading that clients have liked. This option would also be welcome. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
|
AdamplatinumHD private msg quote post Address this user | |
Mirror blur and 3rd party would make me very happy  |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
mikeE private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I completely agree with Dan. 1) I would like to disable dollhouse view. In fact, i think being able to toggle on/off most icons via the url would be helpful. 2) the biggest thing for me is load times. If a customer has to wait 5-10 seconds for the link to load they are not sticking around. I need it to load in the background while we are showing them something real like a hero shot(not a loading bar). 3) more presentation options would allow us to not only stand out from traditional media options but it would also help us stand our from each other. 4) having read about some of the new features, I am hoping that tagging features can be handled in the URL as well. This would help us build intelligence based on our customers. An API would be better but until then making things accessible via the URL would be helpful. 5) I would also like to see traffic stats including where the referring traffic was from so that I could be sure no one had stolen my link to show on their site. My clients have a lot of competition and they are not the sole sellers for some properties. 6) I wish the camera would represent a wider range for the HDR. It may be a hardware limitation but if it can be improved in software that would be great. From a camera standpoint your hardware is facing some competition that provides better images. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?