Work Boot

Thank you stranger. Shows the award.

Shows the Silver Award... and that's it.

  1. i think the reason some surfaces are still lumpy is because the surface is probably a solid color or close to a solid color. traditional photogrammetry needs a surface with lots of small details to resolve an accurate result.

  2. that looks great! was this a turntable setup? also, what exposure setting did you use in camera and on the ar400?

  3. i’ve had some trouble with blurry parts in my textures. one way that seemed to fix it for me was decimate the model and then build a new texture. not an ideal solution but it might work for your usecase.

  4. dont know if there is a way to do such a thing automatically. i do know that in metashape you can filter images based on how sharp they are. that might give you a bit more accurate results while using a couple less images. or you could always just manually take out the images that have to much overlap.

  5. Lol Ive edited that footage on an M1 MacBook Air. The bigger the file sizes, the easier it is to edit.

  6. tru this. my m1 air handles bmpcc6k braw footage perfectly when playback res is set to 4k. (or 2k when heavily colorgraded).

  7. so the trick is to simply have a solid color background. basically you only see the sandal and the rest is a single color (preferably black) metashape will then ignore the background and just use the sandal for alignment. then if you rotate the sandal sideways it will align correctly and you also wont have to do much clean up work.

  8. it depends on the situation. i usually look at aperture first. take some images at different f stops to see at what f stop the whole object is in focus. you want the lowest possible f stop while still having good focus. then for shutterspeed, if you have ibis or a stabilized lens you should be fine with something like 1/50 (also depends on how steady your hands are) or use a monopod. then use iso as last option to compensate for correct exposure. id really not use iso as main exposure setting.

  9. reality capture does the photogrammetry process. thats what creates the mode from the images. blender doesn’t do that. blender is just a regular 3d program which can be used to clean up the mode from reality capture of just make some nice renders with your scanned models.

  10. Ok I really appreciate that answer, but to verify do you need to do that in blender or can you do that in reality as well, perhaps it doesn't do it as well that's fine but would that be correct to say?

  11. nope, you have to use blender. reality capture outputs a model that you can use just fine, and reality capture also offers options to optimize your model.

  12. if you’re capturing say a statue and the background is relatively in focus then your photogrammetry software will also make a 3d model from that background data, as long as your set your “reconstruction box” (area thats going to be calculated) to include that background. you will get a good 3d model of the statue since you’re taking pictures from it from all angels. the background is just the background and will only look okay from a far.

  13. Hi OP! Very good looking stuff. I was wondering what the biggest difference is that you’ve noticed using fd lenses versus let’s say normal canon EF glass? I’ve got some video experience but i can’t help but have some trouble identifying characteristic features of a given type of lens. My eye probably isn’t trained well enough yet.

  14. the biggest differences are that the fd’s are a bit darker then the ef’s (maybe about 1 stop). and that they are not exactly the same focal length. when compared to ef 50mm my fd 50mm acts more as a 55mm (probably has to do something with the adapter?).

  15. isn’t it just really tiny?? cuz the photos seem to be aligned fine. can you show us some input images?

  16. i would recommend keeping the zebras on as it show you the overexposed parts of the images so you can make adjustments using iso/aperture/nd filter to get a good exposure and with more highlight detail, making your shot look much nicer.

  17. Agreed. I would add, however, that since it's a BMPCC, you might as well use false colors, to get a good read on all the values!

  18. i’d recommend doing some testing with your lens at different f stops and compare the differences in sharpness to see what works for your setup/object. i find myself shooting at f18 alot because its only a tiny bit less sharp then say f14 but could sometimes be the difference to having the object fully in focus.

  19. Ah okay so for instance a Disney 3d pixar scene if I want to get the model let's say a character will that be possible

  20. i dont think that would work. to capture an object the model has to be perfectly stationary. usually characters in animated movies do move quite a lot haha. unless you have like a turntable 360 video where they just showcase the character model. but the character needs to be very detailed in order to get a good scan. what character did you have a turntable video of?

  21. It's a character i saw while back it's only movement is spinning but the character is stationary It's also a gif trying to make it into a 3d model sorry for the late reply

  22. gifs are usually very low quality so that might not work great. do you have a link to the video? or screenshot from one of the frames?

  23. i’d recommend just taking photos to get max quality. and the reason your scan doesn’t look so good could also be because of lighting and the surface of the object.

  24. ive had this issue, i dont use lp batteries in the camera anymore when i have np-f connected. that did the trick for me.

  25. wait do you hold this like against your chest/on shoulder or just hands only? because it seems to be quite back heavy.

  26. id recommend you take the raw files through some photo editing software, do some adjustments (lift shadows, bring down highlights etc.) and then export that as jpg’s and bring those into photogrammetry software.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin