A new fraud on the Internet…

It’s very funy for the re-building of the old building. But of course , it’s the same technologie like Pixdim !

A: Take two photos with your hand-held digital camera… and then perform 3D measurement.

iWitness - http://www.geocomp.com.au/

PhotoModeler - http://www.photomodeler.com/

Another interesting one to measures all objects in A photo (certainly with a different ‘technique’)
iPhotoMEASURE - http://www.iphotomeasure.com/

B: If the input source is aerial oblique photo, we probably have to mention the following two companies and their 3D measuring and modelling software. Pictometry’s aerial oblique photo has become a shining feature of its virtual globe platform (Virtual Earth) and been heavily explored for the reconstruction of immersive 3D land surfaces. The technology underlying this sort of things is becoming more relevant than ever as the competition for presenting a better virtual globe intensifies.

Pictometry http://www.pictometry.com
MultiVision http://www.mv-usa.com/

C: If the input source is space-based satellite imagery, too many algorithms and tools to be listed here for 3D measurement and reconstruction … Of course, it can be argued that in this case the main photogrammetric algorithm is different with some similarities …

All are interesting developments!

We have tested our algorithms on both indoor and outdoor images with different lighting and weather conditions. Man-in-the-loop is often unncessary (but the user does have to click on the objects that he/she wants to measure). Robustness is provided against errors in feature localization and correspondence. The algorithm always converges as no iteration is needed.

We will be happy to send you an invite code when the user interface is completed, if you are interested in participating in beta testing. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@visualsize.com

– Yuan-fang

is this what you are claiming?
if your rev model is indeed licensing the API - will there be the ability to tune the algorithms for various applications?

who do i need to pay off to get a beta code

Mike

Google Photomatch is geared toward modeling (to generate dense 3D structures), not metrology (to obtain sparse 3D measurements). It makes some special assumptions about the scene (i.e., a two-point perspective model) to establish the position, orientation, and scale of the 3D model. In more detail,

(1) parallel lines and vanishing points are used to establish the model orientation,
(2) one single reference point (origin) is used to establish the model location, and
(3) one single length to establish the model scale

Our system requires only (3) but not (1) and (2). The reason is that 3D dimensions (length, area, volume) are not affected by translation (different positions) and rotation (different orientations). Hence, if the goal is 3D metrology, requiring (1) and (2) only limits your applicability. The bottom line is that you do not need to build a complete computerized 3D model of the scene (which requires significant user interaction and can be quite computationally intensive and time consuming) to obtain a few 3D measurements.

The idea of Visualsize sounds more correct (we have two eyes for perceiving three dimensions). I can see a lot of applications for this. The effort seems to be minimal – just one more click of the camera button. if the claim is true (you don’t even need to measure the movement of the camera between the two photos), it would be very cool.

It took me about four hours to learn how to use it, so there’s probably room for improvement.

Technology from Photosynth can be adapted to give measurements with some additional work. Photosynth was developed with very different goals and usage scenarios. It has taken a lot of work for Microsoft to build a few demo models. The key is to be able to get back accurate measurement results fast with very simple and intuitive user interface. Our system is optimized for just that: picking the right features and just the right number of features, quickly infer the camera motion and get accurate measurement, know when the measurements are accurate and when they are not. We believe we are doing this better than anyone else.

We do not try to reconstruct the entire 3D scene, just enough information for us to get the measurements, faster and more accurate than anyone else, at least so far.

Thank you for your comments. From a theoretical point of view, it is provable mathematically that

(1) You cannot recover 3D structure from a single image, without some prior information, domain-specific knowledge, and/or special imaging configuration, and
(2) You cannot obtain true 3D dimensions from discrete photographs (even from continuous videos) alone without some external reference of a known size.

Hence, to be a GENERAL 3D metrology system, you must use at least two photographs with a reference of a known size – this is what our system is designed to do. Anything less must fail for certain configurations or is applicable only for limited application domains and/or imaging configurations. Again, this is a mathematically-provable fact.

Furthermore, even with two pictures you must somehow obtain the movement of the camera between the two shots (i.e., the stereo baseline). For consumer applications, it is unrealistic to assume that an expensive, calibrated stereo rig is available or the user can tell you, with precision, how the two pictures are taken. Our algorithm recovers the movement automatically with high precision.

Thanks.

Thanks.

Well, except they don’t do it, neved did and probably never will.
Looks like you did not read the comments to your own post.

The 4 pages “web site” did not change for the past 3 months.
Even the so called demo wasn’t originally produced by fotowoosh.

As for the arbitrary placement of the camera, yes that is a strong advantage to systems that know about camera position like most photogrametry systems. That, ironically, sounds like the technology for creating 3D models from arbitrary photos in Microsoft Photosynth: http://labs.live.com/photosynth/

I agree with the comments, this is very useful technology. I just wonder how commodity it will be very soon. Seems like there is a lot of work in this space already and that it is likely others can easilly match these technologies and don’t need to use them as direct revenue products or can use them as loss leaders for other things. It would be naive to underestimate the abilities of Microsoft or Google in this space with all their recent build up of photogrammetery and related technologies over the last few years.