Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Global seam leveling #17

Open
smathermather opened this issue May 23, 2019 · 10 comments
Open

Global seam leveling #17

smathermather opened this issue May 23, 2019 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@smathermather
Copy link
Collaborator

When processing the OpenDroneMap Aukerman example we get some issue with global seam leveling (ht this unrelated issue: #15).

ODM version:
image

NodeMICMAC version:
image

I have seen this with the reference NodeMICMAC dataset, though to a lesser extent:
image

This is a similar issue to what we saw in ODM here:
OpenDroneMap/ODM#801

Fixed in mvs-texturing here: OpenDroneMap/mvs-texturing#3 OpenDroneMap/mvs-texturing@7c01bca

@dronemapper-io
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks. Yes, currently there isn't a seamline feathering option in stock MicMac so that radiometric balance routine tries its best to blend all tiles. It is more apparently when you have camera or lighting issues. White balance on 'Auto` really causes problems. Definitely something to improve on. JP

@smathermather
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ah, makes sense. That also explains the issues over low-texture areas like the water, which I wasn't sure whether to include with this issue.

@dronemapper-io
Copy link
Collaborator

Implementing a seamline feather routine would solve the issue. There are some additional tweaks to the Tawny command and radiometric balancing that can also improve results.

@dronemapper-io dronemapper-io added the enhancement New feature or request label May 23, 2019
@pierotofy
Copy link
Member

pierotofy commented May 23, 2019

There's an interesting overview of this in the MicMac manual (page 46):

image

I wonder what happens if you pass DEq=1 DegRapXY=[2,0] to Tawny.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/micmacIGN/Documentation/master/DocMicMac.pdf

@dronemapper-io
Copy link
Collaborator

Correct. Yes additional Tawny parameters can improve the results. One can also create a custom .xml and feed this into Porto with a larger blending window / etc.

@kikislater
Copy link
Member

I got better results with this in Malt :
DefCor=0.0

Then this in Tawny :
DEq=1 DegRapXY=[4,1] SzV=3 CorThr=0.6 NbPerIm=5e4

@dronemapper-io
Copy link
Collaborator

Try DEq=1 DegRapXY=[4,4] SzV=75 NbPerIm=5e4

DefCor=0 will force MICMAC to correlate every pixel, even if it is a hidden point. It is good in some cases. Thanks

@kikislater
Copy link
Member

Try DEq=1 DegRapXY=[4,4] SzV=75 NbPerIm=5e4

DefCor=0 will force MICMAC to correlate every pixel, even if it is a hidden point. It is good in some cases. Thanks

Nice feebback, it was missing on MicMac I think ! Never tried this level of size window ... May be it needs a test with screenshots

@dronemapper-io
Copy link
Collaborator

Usually the ortho blending gets the best results when you run MICMAC to the highest zoom level (aka native resolution) as the ortho tiles are draped onto the DEM via nadir index score. Also, if the original raw imagery is from a sub-par camera or has white balance issues -- results will be bad.

@dronemapper-io dronemapper-io self-assigned this Jun 7, 2019
kikislater referenced this issue Jun 9, 2019
enhance radiometric equalization
@Ciaran1981
Copy link

Ciaran1981 commented May 13, 2020

Hi Folks,

I am rather late to this conversation, but a while back I adapted the seam-line feathering to multi-band if anyone is interested in my own python micmac lib - though the micmac testlib func is a bit slow.
https://ciaran1981.github.io/pycmac/build/html/pycmac.html#dense_match.feather

Ossim seems to perform better at this task in my opinion however....

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants