Jump to content

Dave Martin

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Dave Martin

  1. Re Beta 1.0.3 (DB version 2.2.3) Build Apr 26 2018 15:55:31 1) If the user, when updating an equipment entry, just edits the Notes, [Save] is not active - you need to activate [Save] by ‘touching’ another field 2) The ‘Category’ filter resets without clicking clear (as soon as you click [Save]) 3) When creating or editing an equipment record, the [Tab] key skips the serial number field
  2. Re Beta 1.0.3 (DB version 2.2.3) Build Apr 26 2018 15:55:31 Appreciate Rights included by default relate to the twelve promoted by ‘Rights Statements’ – but they’re not necessarily either applicable or appropriate, and they don’t necessarily apply in all jurisdictions either (and even the ‘Rights Statements’ organisation recognises that their twelve not universally applicable). Appreciate you don’t want anyone tampering with those twelve, but think probably need to allow for others to be added/edited as well.
  3. Re Beta 1.0.3 (DB version 2.2.3) Build Apr 26 2018 15:55:31 Stakeholder’s rights are currently linked to a subject and I would query that. A subject is, say, an artefact, and in possibly the majority of cases, there’s no copyright in the object/artefact/subject, the copyright is in the work which documents it. If, say, Organisation A has a Greek sculpture on public display, and they commission a 3-D scan, and organisation ‘B’ has a photogrammetry/RTI campaign, and organisation ‘C’ takes a series of close-up images to document some specific details. Organisation A is linked to the subject as, say, its curator – but has no automatic rights to any representations of it. Organisation ‘A’ may well, though, have rights to the 3-D scan they commissioned. Organisation ‘B’ will probably have rights to their photogrammetry/RTI, and organisation ‘C’ will probably have rights to their documentary photographs. As the linkage is currently to the subject, then in the above case there may be three competing and possibly contradictory rights linkages, one from each organisation, and there would be no way to differentiate which set of images etc. was covered by which rights statements. Whilst there may (more rarely?) be a rights linkage between a stakeholder and a subject or artefact, I would suggest that as the rights really apply to a set of images or similar, it would be better to allow a rights statement to be associated with, say, an acquisition project rather than with the subject – that way it avoids possibility for competing/contradictory rights claims on a subject. Dave
  4. Hi Carla, Thanks all the above, and its great to hear that DLN is still alive. As I've used it quite a bit over the summer I have accumulated some specific comments on the beta (mostly minor UI points but also a couple of structural points) which I'll post here over the weekend. Glad to hear that acquisition type of 'Documentary Photography' will be added, that's very welcome. However, I don't believe it wouldn't be apposite to try and store say a magnetometer survey metadata under the description of "documentary photograph". Fully appreciate that allowing additional techniques names to be added in DLN:CC wouldn't cascade down to dedicated versions of DLN:Inspector. I had noted that certain auxiliary fields were turned on in DLN:CC for lenses and filters; if DLN:CC allowed a couple of other top-level technique names then as the kit would be of other equipment types, then those other fields wouldn't be activated. Allowing just a couple of alternative technique names could take it from a Digital Photography Notebook to more of a Digital Lab Notebook! Dave
  5. Carla, Erich et al: I have used DLN:CC a number of times to record both RTI and photogrammetry sessions, and can see it does accumulate useful information. However, whilst the RTI/photogrammetry sessions have significant numbers of frames exposed, the biggest number of subjects are documents (and to a lesser degree artefacts) which are ‘just’ photographed. Whilst doing so, I keep thinking that DLN:CC would be a great way to record such imaging. Unfortunately DLN:CC only allows “RTI” and “Photogrammetry” projects, so I have tried fudging it by having collections of images in a (not really) photogrammetry project. My first suggestion is that DLN’s scope is extended to allow for Photography (or some other similar description) as well as RTI & Photogrammetry? Taking this a step further, whilst not wishing to dilute the project, I wonder if there's an opportunity to get even more value from DLN:CC. In particular, I've been thinking about geophysical and other similar surveys (where there are equipment categories, models, s/n, operators, etc. - just like RTI or photogrammetry). So, I wonder if it might be possible to have the list of 'Imaging techniques' (or just 'Techniques') able to be expanded - probably in the first case by just allowing a couple of other capture techniques to be named? This could mean that in the one DLN project for an archaeological investigation one could have metadata for, say: site photogrammetry (from UAS), magnetometer survey, GPR, resistance survey, topo survey, trench photography, trench photogrammetry, artefact photographs, artefact RTI, artefact photogrammetry.... merely by allowing the user to add extra techniques called 'Photography', 'Topographical survey', 'Magnetometer survey', 'Resistance survey' and 'GPR survey'. Dave
  6. Lellis, I've got SEP (agent / endpoint NIS- / definitions updated today) and it doesn't impede RTIbuilder.exe - I do though seem to recall that at one time, possibly when first installed, SEP quarantined it and I had to go into the SEP client, view the Quarantine and Restore the program (and flag it not to be excluded again). Dave
  7. Paul, In general, I would say avoid any such modification especially HDR. Contrast stretching might be OK if you can do it identically for all images so the same transformation is applied to all. In photogrammetry alignment the software is trying to find 'identical' key points in multiple images to tie the image geometry together. With HDR, or contrast expansion on a per-frame basis, frames will be modified differently, so reducing the potential number of tie points. And, should you try and texture using HDR or images whose contrast was individually adjusted, then you may well get increased boundary effects in the texture. So, if you really must, you could apply an identical WB shift to all images; or if absolutely necessary a contrast stretch so long as you can apply exactly the same changes to all images. Otherwise, general rule is use the rawest images you can. Dave
  8. Merci bien Emeline, Many thanks for reporting back and glad all is working for you now. Cordialment Dave
  9. Emeline, I'm not involved with the programming, but I don't recall hearing of any dependencies that would affect this. I think Java is used, so it might be worth updating or even re-installing Java to make sure. Other thoughts - if you have a very aggressive firewall, I suppose conceivably it could be stopping access (though I can't dream why) - maybe disconnect your PC/laptop from the network/internet, turn off the firewall and try again? Might also be worth checking firewall logs and Windows event logs in case they show anything? Other than these, I'm sorry but I'm running out of ideas. Cordialment Dave
  10. Emeline, To reduce the variables, can you have another try with the fish data set that CHI provide? Please forgive me if these duplicate what you know or have tried, but this is the simplest set of steps - could you try these as they definitely work. Dave On your PC, if you don’t already have one, make a folder RTI at the top level on your C: drive, and within that, make a folder Fish_1000 so you end up with C:\RTI\Fish_1000 Download the Fish_1000 set of example files from http://culturalheritageimaging.org/What_We_Offer/Downloads/Process/ And then – somewhere else on your PC - expand/extract the fish_fossil-data-set_1000.zip file. In the extracted files, down one level, you will see a folder jpeg-exports Copy that folder and its contents into C:\RTI\Fish_1000 so you end up with C:\RTI\Fish_1000\jpeg-exports which will contain 36 photographs named fish_fossil_01.jpg through fish_fossil_36.jpg Start RTI Builder In the Project Name box, type Fish_test In the Operation Sequence block, click on the first option – Highlight based (HSH Fitter) Then click the [Start new project] button On the Image selection screen which opens with an initial blank list, click the [Open folder] button at the right-hand edge of the screen In the Windows selection box which pops-up, it usually seems to default browsing to ‘My Documents’. Click on the ‘Computer’ icon (fourth one down) in the left-hand bar Double-click on C: Double-click on the RTI folder Double-click on the Fish_1000 folder Then click [Open] (N.B. please don’t click on the ‘jpeg-exports’ folder) You should then see a pop-up ‘Loading images’ with a progress bar When all the images have loaded, you should then see 36 images in the selection pane after which you should be able to proceed with RTI processing; and as you proceed with building your RTI model, you should see an xml and other folders appear in the project folder, so eventually, if you just proceed (using default options and not cropping) you will have: C:\RTI\Fish_1000\assembly-files C:\RTI\Fish_1000\finished-files C:\RTI\Fish_1000\jpeg-exports C:\RTI\Fish_1000\Fish_test.xml and your finished RTI will be C:\RTI\Fish_1000\finished-files\ Fish_test_1000.rti
  11. Thanks Dragos, If you can, it would be great if you could update when you get your RTI working, as we all may benefit form your experience. Dave
  12. Emeline, First quick thought - you're not trying to open the jpeg-exports folder in RTI Builder are you? - you need to open the parent project directory C:\Users\Emeline\Desktop\RTI\MR_390_Vertumne\MR390_Vertumne_attache within which the builder will expect to find the jpeg-exports and will in due course save the MR390_Vertumne_attache.xml and create the assembly-files, cropped-files, and finished-files folders. Dave
  13. Hi Dragos, I've just had a look at the manuscript page image. It's big, but possibly processable. I'm a little confused though: 1) that image doesn't have any reflective sphere(s) that I can see in the shot? which are necessary unless you have a pre-calibrated lighting dome or rig. 2) that image looks to have fairly flat / uniform illumination? rather than from a point source. 3) are you trying to make an RTI out of just one image? - if so, that won't work - you need a number of shots with the camera position/orientation held steady and the point light source illuminating the object from different directions (see the RTI capture guide on CHI's web site at http://culturalheritageimaging.org/What_We_Offer/Downloads/Capture/index.html and the RTI processing guide at http://culturalheritageimaging.org/What_We_Offer/Downloads/Process/index.html ) Can I suggest you get to grips with making an RTI model with the set of images linked to above with CHI provide, which we know work. Dave
  14. Dragos, The screenshot shows "Unknown Error Detected", that is known and various threads on this forum relate to it. It is, I understand, reported as the cryptic "Unknown Error" because RTI Builder hands off to actual Fitter to do the numerical processing, and if the Fitter doesn't work, it doesn't necessarily report why. Have a search here for "unknown error". You have installed the fitter, haven't you? You also mentioned processing "1 file" - that DropBox link doesn't work - do you mean just one picture? (There may also be Mac issues but I'm sorry that I'm not a Mac expert - my last Apple machine was the twin-floppy Apple II on which I wrote some of the software in UCSD Pascal for my PhD - just Windows and Unix for the last forty-odd years) Dave (just another RTI user!)
  15. Dragos, A few things that would help narrow this down: Have you managed to build and view RTI files before? Is it just one set of images that causes this? If you have a set of images that worked previously, can you try re-processing them? Can you advise hardware and operating system? Can you confirm if you have admin rights and full access to the file system on the computer? Can you post a screenshot showing the file structure where the images are that you are hoping to process? Can you share one of the image files you are hoping to see (and process)? Do you have any other computers you could try on? (even with just a small set of a few images) What happens if you try processing the sample image set that CHI provide which is known to work? (download in various resolutions from: http://culturalheritageimaging.org/What_We_Offer/Downloads/Process/) Dave
  16. Henry, I'm sure you're not alone in this! You might find it useful to reach out to bodies such as the (UK based) Museums Association https://www.museumsassociation.org/ If they cannot help directly, they might be able to advise other useful professional curatorial contacts. Dave
  17. Ken, just another thought - you're not moving or re-naming any of the files are you?
  18. Ken, Re trying a known good PTI file; I'm away from my workstation with files currently but if you haven't got this cracked by this evening I'll pop a working RTI in a dropbox folder for you tonight. Dave
  19. Ken, Re the PTM fitter, there's a replacement download link here:
  20. Ken, A few things that would help narrow this down: Have you managed to build and view RTI files before (on any of these machines)? Have you any older RTI files you can (still) open? Is it just one set of images that causes this? If you have a set of images that worked previously, can you try re-processing them and then see if you can open the RTI file? You mention it is the same on multiple computers, does that mean you've done the whole process (generate then view) on each PC? If you generate on one PC is it unreadable on all three PCs? Is it the same if you generate using the PTM fitter? Dave
  21. Niki/Judith, I'm just a fellow-user, not involved with RTI software development, but I also use Windows platform. If it would help you, if you can share some images I would be glad to try them if I get a chance at the weekend. Will send you message with my contact details if you would like me to try. Dave
  22. Niki/Judith, a couple of thoughts: 1) to try and find out if it is something with the images, or with, say, memory, it would be worth as Carla says trying a down-sampled set of the same images just as a test; maybe resample them down to half their size (you can use the free IrfanView to do this in batch mode). 2) also, if you have a smaller number of the big images, does it crash the same? 3) does it always stop on 000361.jpg ? 4) the folder named says ....\cropped\... - are all the images the same size after cropping? - is there any chance the offending one is a different size? 5) is it the same if you try on a different computer? Dave
  23. Whilst I have never done trans-oceanic capture/processing, my advice would be to try and do it on site - not necessarily at the monument but whilst you are still in-country. Points which I would suggest you consider include: 1) the processing overheads are not enormous - certainly unlike the demands placed by processing SfM photogrammetry - and it is well within the capability of a reasonable modern laptop. 2) uploading to a 'cloud' location could be slow and un-reliable. 3) if you process say, same day, you can tell if all is OK; so if you discover a problem you can re-shoot and/or amend your procedures for other forthcoming sites in the same campaign. Even if you are shooting tethered where you can see results on a larger screen as you shoot, it still makes real sense to process at the earliest opportunity. As an example, if the sphere(s) get nudged part-way through a shoot, unless it is a gross movement, each frame will probably still look OK as a standalone frame, but it is only when you do the processing you may find alignment problems (I've done that and had to return to re-shoot, thankfully only 15 miles away). Processing on a good laptop might take a couple of minutes more but not hours more. Edit: another reason, similar to (3) above, is that sometimes when you process, although you didn't make a mistake shooting, when you process it, may reveal 'something', say at the edge of the field of view or just disappearing round the side of something, so you may want to pop back and re-shoot from a different camera position to try and capture more... Dave
  24. Jlutgen, Re version numbers - the one I'm using is 2.0.2 Where you are seeing '3.0' are you sure that's not the software license you're seeing? as that is 'GPL 3.0' ? Dave
  25. Shahin, I think the answer is "it depends"! - it depends on what you're trying to image - a small artefact or a building; it depends on what version of PhotoScan you're using (and just to confuse things, they have renamed it from PhotoScan to Metashape with the release of version 1.5); it depends on the sensor used; etc. Far and away the best place to search for help on PhotoScan is on the dedicated Agisoft forum - just search for "workflow" (almost 80 hits). One thread to which I would particularly refer you to is https://www.agisoft.com/forum/index.php?topic=9485.msg43931#msg43931 which discusses the workflow developed by Tom Noble et al of the USGS, and that of Bob Meij. (would also suggest this might be better in a thread of its own ....) Dave
  • Create New...