{"id":142059988578,"date":"2019-05-15T08:00:56","date_gmt":"2019-05-15T06:00:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sketchfab.com\/blogs\/community\/?p=142059988578"},"modified":"2021-07-27T20:23:49","modified_gmt":"2021-07-27T18:23:49","slug":"zephyr-metashape-reality-capture-time-and-quality-comparison","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sketchfab.com\/blogs\/community\/zephyr-metashape-reality-capture-time-and-quality-comparison\/","title":{"rendered":"Zephyr, MetaShape, Reality Capture: Time and Quality Comparison"},"content":{"rendered":"

When you ask on the forum \u201cHey, what is best photogrammetry software to use?\u201d most people are going to say \u201cUse Reality Capture\u201d, \u201cI use Agisoft software\u201d, \u201cGo and try Zephyr\u201d (those are paid solutions), or one of many open source projects or less popular commercial software. The Internet is full of models created by those 3 paid programs, but there is a lack of comparison tests based on the same photo set showing side-by-side final results for easier comparison. Maybe one will give a better mesh? Maybe it\u2019s possible to get better texture by other? What about calculation times?<\/p>\n

Hi, my name is Jurand and in this article I would like to share results of my comparison test between the 3 most popular paid photogrammetry solutions I have encountered so far. It is good to review strengths and weaknesses before we buy a product. I hope that this article will provide some answers.<\/p>\n

Comparison Parameters<\/h2>\n

Before we start digging into numbers and photos, I would like inform you about a few things. First, I’m not an option tweaker; I like to use products out of box and then try to change settings if the results are not good enough. Second, people who have worked with photogrammetry longer (more than a year) strongly suggest comparing results only with perfect crisp and beautiful photo sets. Maybe, but I believe that most of us who decide to buy one of those programs (Zephyr, MetaShape or Reality) are just beginning our photogrammetry adventure. Photo sets that we usually use come from phones, family trip grade cameras, drone videos recorded during sunny or rainy days and that\u2019s it – we were there once and it\u2019s not possible to go back and get better images.<\/p>\n

In further parts of this article you will see two tests; one with a professional quality photo set of a skull that I took with my work camera (Nikon D610+Tamron 28-75), but taken quickly without earlier planning (I received that epoxy skull for just 5 minutes), and a second where I process photos extracted from somebody\u2019s YouTube video (bad quality of video recording + YouTube compression + photos saved as jpg (extra compression artifacts)). All photo sets are available to download – the links are in the Sketchfab model description.<\/p>\n

What I tested: Basically how 3DFlow Zephyr Lite<\/a>, Agisoft MetaShape standard<\/a> and Reality Capture<\/a> work on same photo sets prepared in 3 ways and how that photo preparation effects processing times, quality, and final texture.<\/p>\n

Ok, so what are you going to see beyond a few models and photos? Like I mentioned, a very important thing – processing times (for test 2). Those times come from the same or similar stages (for each program) that you need to get through to receive 3D textured objects from 2D images. I can’t say how long it will take to process a garden gnome set on your computer, but for sure you will see processing time-speed ratio between those 3 softwares and that should give you more or less an idea what to expect when it comes to time vs. quality. I attach my workstation specification – no overclocking.<\/p>\n

PC configuration<\/strong><\/h3>\n