Hi Peter,
thanks for the reply and apologies for the rushed original email and lack of details. I'll provide a bit more info below about the collection and processed images
- Data Collected with Trimble MX9
- Images loaded to OIC are 360 panos created from the 6 directional cameras and merged into a full equirectangular projection image using LadyBug SDK
- Image metadata take from SBET so accurate position and orientation information
- HFOV = 360 and VFOV=180
- AVgHtAG = 2.5 (Truck mounted)
- When adding Images to OIC no DEM or rendering rules were used
The confusing part, to me, is why the coverage polygons look correct when using the published OIC in Pro (screenshot 3) . But using the exact same published OIC in a 2D web map with the WAB widgets (July release) the coverage polygon appears truncated (screenshot 1).
Only when tilting the 360 image down 40° does the base extend to the exposure point of the image (screenshot 2).
This suggests to me the elevation of the image used in the web map is higher than it really is?
I'm not sure what the affect of the DEM assigned (or not) when adding images to the OIC is and whether may affect things, but again why would it be different in Pro to the AGOL web map?
Thanks,
Dave