I have set of images. When I processed the images, the map projection I got is something like WGS84 14 N. But, I want to process the images with some custom defined projection like EPSG:32614 etc…,
It is similar to GCP processing but I have only EPSG code/projection co-ordinate system but not the co-ordinates
Any help appreciated, thanks
You should be able to use proj4 strings.
https://proj4.org/usage/quickstart.html
It’s definitely a rough point of ODM but might be fixed in the future. You should be able to search up the specifics about your EPSG codes and figure out the necessary info to create the proj4 strings.
This site should be able to give you a proj4 string if you’re lazy like me and want to just copy it.
http://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/wgs-84-utm-zone-14n/
Hello everybody,
Is there any news about adding support for epsg codes?
It would be really useful as it is not possible to generate accurate maps for surveying engineering locally without epsg.
Kind regards,
Christos
Read the post above yours: you can use the proj4 string of your EPSG code.
It’s definitely something that would be nice to have, but not strictly necessary for achieving your goal.
Hello and thanks for your reply we have already tried this. It doesn’t work with longitude latitude coordinates, even if we use the projection string, correct me if I’m wrong.
You are correct. You need to use a projected coordinate system, not an angular coordinate system (lat/lon). Adding EPSG functionality doesn’t change this.
What you can do is create a GCP file using geographic coordinates with the proj string for EPSG 4326 and load that in the GCP interface. It will automatically project those coordinates into UTM for you.
I can import the file into gcp interface and points are shown on the map correctly. Then I can do the job, matching gcp on map and photos. Finally when I click export the exported file is still in long-lat with the same projection string rather than utm.
Hmm, that’s not the correct behavior and sounds like a regression. Can you open a bug report here?: https://github.com/posm/posm-gcpi/issues
Hello
We also need to create orthophoto in custom epsg. We have docker WebODM installation in our environment. But I can’t figure out how to use proj4 string mentioned in post above…
I found this info https://github.com/OpenDroneMap/ODM/wiki/Run-Time-Parameters (–proj parameter) but still don’t know how to use it in webodm. Could someone help with this?
You can use EPSG codes as well instead of proj4 strings for your GCP file.
EPSG:4326
[... rest of GCP file in lat/lon WSG84 ... ]
If you need to reproject the orthophoto to a different projection, you’ll need to do it manually using GDAL. Support for custom EPSGs is a planned feature: https://github.com/OpenDroneMap/ODM/issues/1050)
Correct me if I am wrong.
After uploading files to webodm server and process them to get orthophoto map I can downlad resulting geotiff only in one default epsg (WGS 84), yes?
If I need that geotiff in diffrent epsg I have to transform them using other tool e.g. GDAL?
GeoTIFF will be in UTM, but yes you need GDAL if you want another EPSG.
I’d like to reopen this discussion. I agree that it is easy to reproject your GeoTiff afterwards but it’s slow. My main argument for directly working in the correct coordinate system is to save time.
The time that I care about it the total time (ODM time + postprocess time). I think there would be a big time saving for my total time if you could use the correct coordinate system directly in ODM.
The results that I am interested in are Orthophoto + DEM. I need both of them in the specified coordinate system. Supporting all EPSG coordinate systems is already a good step but if possible I would also like to have support for custom coordinate systems.
Have you tried reprojecting from the WebODM UI? We added it in the View Map function in v1.9.11
I haven’t. Is that an on-the-fly reprojection or does it actually store the reprojected data after some post processing step?
I am using the command line API to integrate in some other code. So this doesn’t really help my ‘total processing time’ issue.
It is an on-disk export of the final product.
Ahh, okay. I didn’t understand your workflow.