Datugram software

I have not used it yet, but I am curious too.

I went to an extensive demo last week. Looked very interesting. I can see lots of uses for it. There is a learning curve, of course. Proper field procedures, plenty of control needed.

John Hamilton, post: 333049, member: 640 wrote: I went to an extensive demo last week. Looked very interesting. I can see lots of uses for it. There is a learning curve, of course. Proper field procedures, plenty of control needed.

And Height.

Do you want to put a 25+ megapixel camera on a selfie stick?

"Do you want to put a 25+ megapixel camera on a selfie stick?"

I'm thinking that a 6' or 8' stepladder would be the thing for the elevated pictures.

We bought a 21MP Samsung NXMini and a swivel mount that threads onto the top of a 25' Crain level rod. Granted, I wouldn't want it to tip over, but I'm not worried about it falling off. The highest I've gone with it was 17.2', I wasn't too comfortable with going higher than that.

My recollection is that the Datugram application takes a bunch of photos as input and allows the user to derive positional information only of discreet points, and only after considerable post-processing by the operator. It seemed really labor-intensive for what you get, especially since a reflectorless instrument can, in many cases, collect the same positional information with greater confidence in much less time. A real scanner would take less time and produce a high-res model.

I just couldn't figure out what problem Datugram solves that other technologies don't solve more effectively and efficiently. Or am I thinking of a different product?

"A real scanner would take less time and produce a high-res model."
Datugram will do what it does for a much smaller investment.

Norman Oklahoma, post: 333841, member: 9981 wrote: Datugram will do what it does for a much smaller investment.

So will a reflectorless total station. For the $7k cost of Datumate (don't forget to add for training) it seems like an awfully expensive way to produce small numbers of positions that have relatively large uncertainties when compared with field-surveyed points. I looked at the demos and concluded that it doesn't make sense for my purposes; YMMV.

Jim Frame, post: 333863, member: 10 wrote: So will a reflectorless total station. For the $7k cost of Datumate (don't forget to add for training) it seems like an awfully expensive way to produce small numbers of positions that have relatively large uncertainties when compared with field-surveyed points. I looked at the demos and concluded that it doesn't make sense for my purposes; YMMV.

yes, your mileage will vary, but in defense of Datugram and other close range terrestrial photogrammetry (CRTP):
(i have demo'd Datugram and a few others, but am not a compensated endorser of any CRTP products)
1 most CRTP software can now operate with imaging from modestly priced cameras (~$300)
2 most CRTP software have a price range that beats 3D scanning software
3 most CRTP field surveys are collected faster than 3D scanning surveys. if i am not mistaken, 3D scanners are to be set up in a stable location and leveled, just as a theodolite would. set your camera out and collect your images moves as fast as robotic topography; move ahead and take an image with an HI of about 5.5', same at HI 8.5', same at HI 12.5'. when i did this i had a 1/4" 20 TPI threaded rod on a level rod as a standee for the camera. the camera itself was Bluetooth tethered to a smart phone as a remote control. i was able to collect images at an HI of something near 20', so that setup is very effective

a product such as Datugram needs a sample set of clearly identifiable points in XYZ, then computes the balance of the pixels. in many cases, if the overlaps are done properly, Datugram stitches the images together even on images that do not have pre-defined coordinates for a sample set of pixels. in other words, the software CAN fill in the blanks for you.

scenario project:
set up GPS/GNSS for absolute control, use a reflectorless to collect coordinates on easily distinguishable points, marks, edges, etc.
take images with the camera with the proper overlaps (some CRTP software prefers/demands that images be collected in a sensible spatial order, rather than one here and one way over there, and oh, i forgot i should get something there too)
download and process GPS/GNSS, reflectorless, and CRTP

it is a cost savings compared to 3D scans, and can be faster than a 3D scan project overall

Moe Shetty, post: 333914, member: 138 wrote: yes, your mileage will vary, but in defense of Datugram and other close range terrestrial photogrammetry (CRTP):
(i have demo'd Datugram and a few others, but am not a compensated endorser of any CRTP products)
1 most CRTP software can now operate with imaging from modestly priced cameras (~$300)
2 most CRTP software have a price range that beats 3D scanning software
3 most CRTP field surveys are collected faster than 3D scanning surveys. if i am not mistaken, 3D scanners are to be set up in a stable location and leveled, just as a theodolite would. set your camera out and collect your images moves as fast as robotic topography; move ahead and take an image with an HI of about 5.5', same at HI 8.5', same at HI 12.5'. when i did this i had a 1/4" 20 TPI threaded rod on a level rod as a standee for the camera. the camera itself was Bluetooth tethered to a smart phone as a remote control. i was able to collect images at an HI of something near 20', so that setup is very effective

a product such as Datugram needs a sample set of clearly identifiable points in XYZ, then computes the balance of the pixels. in many cases, if the overlaps are done properly, Datugram stitches the images together even on images that do not have pre-defined coordinates for a sample set of pixels. in other words, the software CAN fill in the blanks for you.

scenario project:
set up GPS/GNSS for absolute control, use a reflectorless to collect coordinates on easily distinguishable points, marks, edges, etc.
take images with the camera with the proper overlaps (some CRTP software prefers/demands that images be collected in a sensible spatial order, rather than one here and one way over there, and oh, i forgot i should get something there too)
download and process GPS/GNSS, reflectorless, and CRTP

it is a cost savings compared to 3D scans, and can be faster than a 3D scan project overall

Good morning Moe,

During your demos, did you happen to try any of the online photo to 3D processors such as Autodesk ReCap 360?

Thanks,
G

George Matica, post: 333918, member: 6663 wrote: Good morning Moe,

During your demos, did you happen to try any of the online photo to 3D processors such as Autodesk ReCap 360?

Thanks,
G

George I have heard of it, but my demo was with Datugram only, i believe the version was called 'Datugram 3D'.
having said that, i have looked at some consumer grade photo 3D processors in the past and they mostly are consumer grade.

Moe Shetty, post: 333914, member: 138 wrote: it is a cost savings compared to 3D scans, and can be faster than a 3D scan project overall

The video below, while pretty long, looks like it represents a realistic project example. What it told me is that, while the cost of equipment and software for the Datumate solution is maybe 10% of that for an entry-level scanner and software, the amount of post-processing to get each and every point and line with Datumate is tremendous.

My understanding is that with a scanner, once you register the scans all the discrete points -- generally millions of them -- are defined and effectively QC'd. You're then free to pick any points you desire to define entities, and they all have standard errors consistent with the reflectorless measurements used to acquire them. By contrast, with Datumate you have to perform an adjustment and QC analysis on each and every discrete point that you want to extract. You have to fuss with each point, checking it in multiple photos, and the resulting errors will reflect the application operator's ability to discern and select pixels across multiple images.

I have no experience with scanners, so perhaps I'm underestimating the time required to post-process a scan job. But the videos I've seen of the Faro Focus, for example, make the process appear to be much, much faster and smoother. I continue to question the cost-effectiveness of the Datumate approach, unless you only need it for a simple one-time job and are willing to grind through the tedious process of point identification in order to minimize cost.

[MEDIA=youtube]mMp4xOIOIX4[/MEDIA]

Jim Frame, post: 333929, member: 10 wrote: The video below, while pretty long, looks like it represents a realistic project example. What it told me is that, while the cost of equipment and software for the Datumate solution is maybe 10% of that for an entry-level scanner and software, the amount of post-processing to get each and every point and line with Datumate is tremendous.

My understanding is that with a scanner, once you register the scans all the discrete points -- generally millions of them -- are defined and effectively QC'd. You're then free to pick any points you desire to define entities, and they all have standard errors consistent with the reflectorless measurements used to acquire them. By contrast, with Datumate you have to perform an adjustment and QC analysis on each and every discrete point that you want to extract. You have to fuss with each point, checking it in multiple photos, and the resulting errors will reflect the application operator's ability to discern and select pixels across multiple images.

I have no experience with scanners, so perhaps I'm underestimating the time required to post-process a scan job. But the videos I've seen of the Faro Focus, for example, make the process appear to be much, much faster and smoother. I continue to question the cost-effectiveness of the Datumate approach, unless you only need it for a simple one-time job and are willing to grind through the tedious process of point identification in order to minimize cost.

[MEDIA=youtube]mMp4xOIOIX4[/MEDIA]

Jim,

I've been of the same opinion. That's why whenever looking at these photo-based point cloud solutions, I've tried to find a way to save on investment in desktop SW and leave the processing to services like ReCap 360, etc.
I just haven't had the time to sit down and run some projects through the diff services.

G

George Matica, post: 333935, member: 6663 wrote: That's why whenever looking at these photo-based point cloud solutions

I think it's worth noting that the photogrammetric approach doesn't produce a point cloud, it merely allows the user to create discrete points. (Laboriously, I might add.) A scanner, by contrast, actually takes angle and distance measurements and produces a true "cloud" of points.

Jim we did a two week trial of Datugram, it's not as tedious as all of that. What we found is that the photos have to be taken in a very specific manner; you need about 80% overlap and you can't jump around, the software looks at the photos in sequence. But if you do a good job with that, the software is able to tie the photos together and once you "show" it a few control points the process becomes pretty automated. When you pick a point in one photo, the software finds it in others and calculates it. There were a couple of things in the demo we did that really impressed me:
- Datugram links to AutoCAD and when you create points and lines they're drawn automatically in real time. Unfortunately, however, the only version of ACAD currently supported is AutoCAD 2014 (not Civil 3D). So unless you have that you're back to DXF and ASCII files.
- You can define a polygon and the software will create a point cloud - we did this in the demo on our parking lot and the surface looked very good.

We have a Trimble V10 and I'm not sure that Datugram gives us any capabilities for terrestrial photogrammetry that we don't already have. But they have one or two very intriguing sample projects where they put a camera on a rotary UAS and set out photo targets - in the one I looked at they're claiming to have produced a topo and DTM of a 15.5 acre site with four hours of field work and two days of office work, with 2cm accuracy throughout.

I'm not completely sold on it, that's why I was hoping to hear about some real-world experiences from people using it for production. But I think that once quality point clouds can be produced using photogrammetry with similar accuracy to a scanner, expensive scanners may go the way of the dinosaur other than for certain specific applications.

i think it is interesting software but with limited (and time consuming) use. It's only usable outdoors i think. Creating floorplans from houses can't be done.

On a demo everything always works smooth and without a glitch. I would like to see a job where there are problems and how to solve them.

With laserscanning i can define planes and intersect them for linework. i can model 3d tubes, beams, create ortophotos,... I believe after registration of the scans i can pickpoint the data i want much easier and moire accurate.

The only advantage is the time on site, taking pictures goes faster than scanning

As far as from the ground is concerned, I think the V10 is more useful, and of course a scanner gives you a lot more. We just received our new TX8 yesterday, and the data you get from a scanner is unbeatable (I had a Trimble GX for about 7 years).

Where I think datugram is useful is in the air. They did a survey of a large intersection using a drone, but they had to set a LOT of control. You can use an inexpensive drone, and a standard camera. I think anyone who is serious about using a drone to acquire data is going to go a few steps up to get a good platform and a good camera. I am heading out to Reno at the end of September to look at all the possibilities (ASPRS). The photogrammetirc company I am teamed up with wants to use it in their standard workflow (vertical imagery) for small sites.

Until I can get a better platform and camera, here is what I am using in the meantime, a picture of our entire fleet on the ramp at the airport:

Seriously, some of the early work with aerial photography was done using pigeons:

Pigeon Aerial Photography

There's no question that you can do a lot more with scan data, and I'm sure it's more precise. I'm not suggesting that Datugram can do what a scanner can do.

@ John glad to hear you got your TX8; it looks like a good product. I'll be interested to hear how you like it after you've done a couple projects with it.

Do you use Real Works for all your processing?