-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 979
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
If a boundary is defined, the model becomes distorted. #1588
Comments
Thanks for the report, but it looks like you didn't include a copy of your dataset for us to reproduce this issue? Please make sure to follow our issue guidelines 🙏 p.s. I'm just an automated script, not a human being. |
I have now started a process to create the same error. I will share it when the process is completed. https://whatismybrowser.com/w/QTBMTAX I installed with docker |
console output in rar When auto-boundary is set to true and the boundary is a polygon, the model breaks if crop is set to 0. However, if crop is set to its default value, the model can be generated without issues. The parameters I am using are as follows: auto-boundary:true, boundary:geojson, crop:0, dem-resolution:2, dsm:true, feature-quality:high, gps-accuracy:0.1, max-concurrency:2, no-gpu:true, optimize-disk-space:true, orthophoto-resolution:1, rerun-from:dataset, rolling-shutter:true, tiles:true, use-exif:true JSON STRING: {"type": "FeatureCollection","features": [{"type": "Feature","properties": {},"geometry": {"type": "Polygon","coordinates": [[[29.102999,40.189874],[29.103098,40.189964],[29.103446,40.189993],[29.103499,40.189913],[29.102999,40.189874]]]}}]} |
I have identified an issue in WebODM version 2.5.6 that was not present in previous versions. In a project consisting of 300-400 images, I can generate the model without any issues when using the auto-boundary and rolling-shutter options. However, when I define a boundary using a GeoJSON polygon while both auto-boundary and rolling-shutter are set to true, the model becomes distorted. Has anyone else encountered this issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: