nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Include parameters in the ArcGIS Site Scan processing report.

tempLeidyGarcía

It is suggested that for the new version of the SiteScan processing report, the parameters of GSD, Covered Area, as well as the general views of the products (orthomosacio, digital elevation models) and their respective execution time, be added.

Find more posts tagged with

Under Consideration

Status: Under Consideration

Comments

P√•l_Herman_Sund

Many thanks for @NicoBonnafoux I shall use the feedback options but keep posting here as well.

NicoBonnafoux

@tempLeidyGarcía, @Pål_Herman_Sund,

Thank you for your feedback. As the Reality Engine in Site Scan is still in beta, it would be helpful to our team if you could use the feedback form shown in the processing menu to share these ideas and any other comments you may have regarding the beta.

Thanks!

P√•l_Herman_Sund

Adding to @tempLeidyGarcía ideas: I miss a couple of things in the "new" (SURE) report and there are a couple of strange things or "bugs".

Processed a mission "Damv_criss_40" in my project "phs_demo_GT2023" yesterday, and see the following in the adjustment report:

Project Name is "photos" 🙂
There is no reference to the mission
References to images are looking like "global id's". Both in the "Tie Point Projection Error Per Image" table and in the "Ground Control Points Reprojection Residual" table. Would be nice to see the image filename if you were to go for troubleshooting (see attached images)
I really miss the initial values in the Camera Calibration table. A couple of times I have had problems getting the expected quality in the adjustment (both in Site Scan and Drone2Map) and one/only indicator was large uncertainties and delta's in the camera calibration. Now we only have the result of the calibration.

best
pH