Hello GeoNet Friends!
I am working with some a tiled 3D model that I built with Agisofts Photoscan and exported as Scene Layer Package.
I have an interesting situation going on when I try and add the .slpk file to "My Scene" in ArcGis Online (AGO).
I opened the same file in ArcGis Pro, and was able to view it and it displayed nicely as a 3D map, however when I load it into AGO the resulting model is very strange looking, built with irregular shaped polygons, and the surface (texture) is a repeating image collage from a section of the model. The location is correct, the measure tool is giving accurate measurements and the shape of features in the model are accurate ( for example the shape of the farm is clearly identifiable: See attachment) so it appears there is no problem with the geographic elements of the file. To me it seems like possibly the surface/texture file is not being loaded properly? I am not sure, and I have looked around online but have not seen anyone with any similar issues. I am wondering how to fix this issue.
It is worth mentioning that in AGO, when I am zoomed out a bit I can see the model is loaded and displayed properly but as soon as I zoom in on it, it starts populating the model with the strange surfaces that I mentioned earlier in the post. (See attached Document with screenshots)
Also, I tried viewing it in different browsers (Google Chrome and Internet Explorer) and was still getting the same erroneous results.
Thanks for the reply, I actually tried to attach the .slpk but it said it was too large... Can I sent it to you via email? If so I just would need your email, or let me know how else I can share it.
Just wanted to give you an update. I believe this behavior could be related to either a texture compression corruption or incorrect texture coordinates. I'm having a developer look into it deeper. Within the slpk there are jpeg textures, which ArcGIS Pro is reading from and compressed textures, which ArcGIS Online is reading from. That's why we are seeing a difference in behavior between the clients. I'll update you once we have narrowed it down further and then discuss next steps.
Many thanks! Wow that sounds interesting.. I wasn't aware that the different programs were referencing different texture files? ! I really appreciate you helping me get to the bottom of this.
Our developer was able to narrow down the problem to the compressed textures missing pyramids (or mipmaps). The i3s specification requires that compressed textures contain pyramids but it looks like Photoscan is not writing out the pyramids. When you are exporting to slpk in Photoscan do you have any options that you can set?
Thanks for the reply, this is good to know.
I wonder if there is any way I can compress the texture within the .slpk file once it has been exported?
There are no options when selecting "Export Tiled Model" other then the "Save As types" : (Cesium 3D tiles, PhotoMesh Layer, AgiSoft Tiled Model, OpenSceneGraph layer).
I should note that there also is another tab in the file dropdown that says "Export Texture". However it does not give you any options either, other than "Save As types" ( .jpg, .png, .tiff, .bmp, .exr, .tga)
I wonder if I could create a map that is compatible in AGO (w/ i3s files?) without buying more software. I would prefer to continue to use Photoscan as I've found its capabilities are superior to other software options such as Pix4D, etc.
I wonder if Drone2Map application could help in this situation?
Thanks for any and all help you offer,
The issue here is that the dds file, which is a container that contains the dxt texture and the pyramids is missing the pyramids. Unfortunately, there is no way for us to create the pyramids after the slpk has already been created. Moving forward, i'll check with our Web Scene team to see if there's any way to fallback to the JPEG texture so it'll display properly in ArcGIS Online. I'll also see if we have a contact at Agisoft so we can notify them that the slpks are not being created properly. Drone2Map does create the slpks properly but that would require reprocessing the original imagery and it is a premium application so it would be an additional cost. I'll see what I can find out and be back in touch.