I ran a test project
yesterday with Phantom 4 pro using Map Pilot to capture the data and processed it with
Global Mapper.?ÿ I flew at a little over 300' agl with 70% side lap and 80% end lap as per Lee's suggestion.?ÿ It took 52 photos, and processed well under an hour.?ÿ No ground control, just flew it to see what it would look like, about 8 acres.?ÿ
I was surprised that the resolution wasn't as good as I expected at 1 inch per pixel.?ÿ Probably due to the height. I thought it would be better than that.?ÿ PDF is attached, which may not be a good indication of the global mapper point cloud and ortho photo.?ÿ I will probably create some contours and play with it a little.
Criticism is welcome, help and hints are greatly appreciated.?ÿ I'm green at this. ?ÿ
I did the ICS diploma to supplement my surveying education many years ago.?ÿ I was pretty sure that I would never design a wooden water line in a real work situation.?ÿ I didn't think that I would ever use photogrammetry, either, but you never know what you may use.?ÿ I'm still doubtful about designing a wooden waterline like they did a hundred years ago, though.?ÿ
pdf didn't attach properly don't look like, sorry about that.
pdf didn't attach properly don't look like, sorry about that.
Worked for me, looks good...
Hopefully you received your FAA permit to fly over the public?
pdf didn't attach properly don't look like, sorry about that.
Worked for me. Doesn't look so bad from where I'm sitting. Good job!
I didn't realize they issued permits to fly over the public, I gotta get one of those!
All I got is a temporary airman certificate for a remote pilot.?ÿ
I guess I was expecting too much.?ÿ When I zoom in, it's pretty blurry.?ÿ Looks like it would be kinda hard to pick out the ground control targets.
My drone case isn't easy to see at that height, but it will probably work out OK.?ÿ
I had planned on retaining a consultant to help me, but it just isn't in the budget.?ÿ
It isn't easy to find data on the general parameters, settings, etc, for flying a mission, or it hasn't been for me.
For instance, how far should one fly outside the boundary to capture enough data?
Is it better to fly at noon on a sunny day, or fly on a cloudy day?
Is this just flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants-stuff, or is it maybe written down somewhere?
thanks,?ÿ jts
What Mp rating of camera is this from? The fellow from Aerotas who spoke at the PLSO mentioned, I think, 0.3' resolutions at 300' AGL. Which looks like about what you have here.
We run about 140 agl with 75% overlap and get very good results. I am extracting planimetry from a 220 acre flight right now. I can read the 'ram' on the floor mat that I used as a landing pad.
I didn't realize they issued permits to fly over the public, I gotta get one of those!
All I got is a temporary airman certificate for a remote pilot.?ÿ
?ÿ
They don't issue permits for flying over the public or public right of way such as a road.?ÿ You may want to checkup on the FAA rules before those 'in the know' report you.?ÿ It happens more often than you might think.?ÿ The only company that has a drone license/waiver for flying over the public is CNN.?ÿ?ÿ https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/
Of course they don't. I figured you could read the sarcasm in my post.
(sarcasm on) I guess I failed the part about flying over a public right of way also, thanks for the help! (sarcasm off)
Norman, I used a phantom 4 pro with 20 mp camera, says it was getting 1" per pixel at that height.
That probably translates to about 0.3' resolution for what I've read.?ÿ
I guess my expectations were set a little too high.?ÿ
?ÿ
Bionic, I don't think my computer would handle 220 acres at 140' agl.?ÿ
It's interesting to know that it can be done.?ÿ
I didn't realize they issued permits to fly over the public, I gotta get one of those!
All I got is a temporary airman certificate for a remote pilot.?ÿ
I guess I was expecting too much.?ÿ When I zoom in, it's pretty blurry.?ÿ Looks like it would be kinda hard to pick out the ground control targets.
My drone case isn't easy to see at that height, but it will probably work out OK.?ÿ
I had planned on retaining a consultant to help me, but it just isn't in the budget.?ÿ
It isn't easy to find data on the general parameters, settings, etc, for flying a mission, or it hasn't been for me.
For instance, how far should one fly outside the boundary to capture enough data?
Is it better to fly at noon on a sunny day, or fly on a cloudy day?
Is this just flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants-stuff, or is it maybe written down somewhere?
thanks,?ÿ jts
We've been flying around 150' AGL with a 75% overlap like Thebionicman had mentioned and we've been getting good results so far. Any higher than that and it's tough to pick out your GCP's with any type of consistency.
As far as how far you should be flying outside of your boundary, we've had good luck with what the programs have recommended based on what overlap has been chosen. We use Pix4D, and Map Pilot.
Cloudy days always have worked the best for us with minimal shadowing present.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
We picked up a gaming computer and havent regretted it yet. I smashed 20gb of ortho photos plus my surface into one drawing. It flies..?ÿ
Work on the assumption that the outer two lines you fly probably won't produce too much good info (but will help firm up the inside lines). Using a Sony A6000 from 300 ft. we normally get around 3cm. ground resolution. From that height 6 inch targets are OK for single use, but if you are going to fly the site at intervals go for larger ones - 16 inch cut nicely out of 4 ft. sheets. We use crosses on the targets, but others have found circles work well.
what do you guys use for ground targets?
About all I've seen from suppliers around this area is material, probably for making large conventional targets.
