Ok newbie here, I’ve run several missions including one today which was flown on a grid pattern, and I’m happy with the 2D https://maphub.online/?ll=51.61172%2C-0.70600&z=18 However the 3D is full of holes as can be seen in this image
If it helps it’s a dronelink mission
What Processing Options did you use?
What survey plan did you use? Does it have a lower orbit with shallower gimbal angles to help capture under the eaves of the buildings?
Hope this helps
| Created on: | 16/06/2022, 16:36:33 |
|---|---|
| Processing Node: | node-odm-1 (auto) |
| Options: | auto-boundary: true, dsm: true, pc-quality: high, dem-resolution: 2.0, orthophoto-resolution: 2.0 |
| Average GSD: | 11.7 cm |
| Area: | 118,358.91 m² |
| Reconstructed Points: | 3,572,461 |
Plan was a mapping plan in dronelink, all photos taken at 285 feet ATL with gimbal at -90
You’re likely going to have gaps then, since you won’t have good enough oblique coverage.
You can try raising --feature-quality, --pc-quality, and --min-num-features, but don’t expect miracles 
Ok I’ll have a play, what if i was to take another set of photos say 100 foot lower and with the gimbal maybe at -75 and included them in the dataset, would that help, just curious, thanks for your help
Yes, that should absolutely help. Same if you can hit maybe -60 and -45 or so in addition to -75, if you really want/need the sides of objects. It should give you a much more complete reconstruction.
Ok thanks for the help, watch this space
Ok Saijin I had a play using the following settings:
| Created on: | 17/06/2022, 00:19:17 |
|---|---|
| Processing Node: | node-odm-1 (auto) |
| Options: | auto-boundary: true, dem-resolution: 2.0, dsm: true, feature-quality: ultra, min-num-features: 20000, orthophoto-resolution: 2.0, pc-quality: ultra |
| Average GSD: | 11.63 cm |
| Area: | 118,661.59 m² |
| Reconstructed Points: | 14,751,105 |
This did indeed help as it got rid of that big hole in the hedge as you can see
Just need to get back out and fly it with some different altitude and gimbal angles, thanks again for helping a newbie out
Awesome! Glad you’re getting closer to what you want 
And help is what I’m here for (and also to learn from everyone else :D), so no worries.
I wouldn’t get rid of this dataset yet, either. We have some big changes landing in and just before ODM v2.8.6 that might help improve things further. But yeah, absolutely (if you can) grab those other “layers” of your flight plan with the different gimbal angles.
Ok, been playing around a bit more and flew a mission with 2 layers, one at 285 feet and -90 gimbal, then the second layer at 185 feet and -75 gimbal, I then ran the resulting dataset twice:
This one with these settings
| Created on: | 20/06/2022, 14:19:05 |
|---|---|
| Processing Node: | node-odm-1 (auto) |
| Options: | auto-boundary: true, dsm: true, pc-quality: high, dem-resolution: 2.0, orthophoto-resolution: 2.0 |
| Average GSD: | 8.5 cm |
| Area: | 123,878.56 m² |
| Reconstructed Points: | 12,980,448 |
Then Again with these
| Created on: | 23/06/2022, 11:32:11 |
|---|---|
| Processing Node: | node-odm-1 (auto) |
| Options: | auto-boundary: true, dem-resolution: 2.0, dsm: true, feature-quality: ultra, min-num-features: 20000, orthophoto-resolution: 2.0, pc-quality: ultra |
| Average GSD: | 8.52 cm |
| Area: | 123,767.15 m² |
| Reconstructed Points: | 53,919,369 |
There seem to be a couple more posts recently on similar lines
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
