![]() No solver will solve a blurry, shaky, over/under exposed, sparse data set. The way the photos are captured is infinitely more important than the software solving it. I feel this will push the small studio/hobbyist to use the free software available instead of swallowing the larger cost. However, in the last year, the free software have made tremendous strides in quality and quickly gaining ground. We have run thousands of images sets with different machines configurations running different photogrammetry software. ![]() I only speak of Metashape and Realit圜apture as they are the only ones that produce the quality needed at a professional studio level. So it comes down to speed, ability to run out of core on older machines, and lidar alignment (RC) vs technical precision/editing, robust lens tools, cloud analysis tools(Photoscan). I would of understood an increase of 99 to 250 3/months, about 1k a year for small studios, but most of those don't need more than 2500 pics over 50 Mpx for a project. That you get to keep, forever, no more money out. ![]() That also translates into a Pro Metashape license after 12 months. I have been testing it out and seeing if it fits into our pipeline better, as we also Lidar sets.Īt this price point, it's more expensive for a month of Realit圜apture over a permanent Photoscan/Metashape standard license ($274 vs $179). The news has me a bit sad, as it was less technical than Photoscan/Metashape, but was quicker and could run on lower end machines more efficiently. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |