Welcome Mavic Pilot!
Jump in and join our free DJI Mavic community today!
Sign up

The first run of mapping with the Mavic.

Sencorp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
70
Reaction score
57
Age
47
Loc
New Zealand
Greetings all.
I wanted to place a few images of the first scans using the Mavic in 3D mapping. I did a mapping of a mates new home over the weekend, and collected the following data;

  • Plant health
  • Land elevation
  • And 3D modeling
I have tons more data other then the three top categories and am in the process of 3D printing the 3D scan of the property. I would love to hear from anyone else out there that is active in mapping now, that would like to be added to the coming collaboratory that my company is developing to be part of a think tank program around this type of tech. If so, please feel free to get in touch with me.


**Just adding an edit to the post with the 3D scan ** Please note this was done with only 36 images and manually flown.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mamayda and flodi

Ed_2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
46
Reaction score
17
Age
50
A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)
 

Threshold

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Messages
68
Reaction score
31
Age
31
Very cool, I was waiting to see someone accomplish this. The house seems to have a wrong (low) elevation, perhaps I could be wrong. How are you setting the min and max elevations of the point cloud? Since the mavic's elevation is arbitrary, I would have to assume the levels of the point could would need to be adjusted.

I am also curious if you are using automation to capture the site with the mavic pro.

As far as a future application. More and more states are releasing lidar and updated aerial imagery. The only benefit this type of survey would create is small sites and/or states with old GIS resources.
 
Last edited:

Threshold

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Messages
68
Reaction score
31
Age
31
A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)
Fixed wing planes are more effective for imagery capturing but often requires a lot of money to capture and process all the data. Many states get these data for free because of a government initiative (I.E. mapping flood areas or taking inventory). This means that most of the state is not covered by the data.
 

bakerboy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
298
Reaction score
92
Age
29
My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)
More area, yes. But at the loss of a stabilized image
 

bakerboy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
298
Reaction score
92
Age
29
Just curious what you mean by stabilized image?
A fixed wing uav are mostly running a camera attached directly to the airframe, and as the wind hits the airframe and it rolls the camera is no longer pointing straight down

a quad runs at least a 2 axis gimbal so it will always point straight down, allowing for better stitching and modelling
 

Ed_2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
46
Reaction score
17
Age
50
More area, yes. But at the loss of a stabilized image
Just hope they start selling light planes with gimbals (actually never searched for such models, maybe they already exist).

I'm a Mavic and Phantom owner, but my subject of interest (mountains) is too large for them.
 

tkinva

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
57
Reaction score
41
Age
79
I think you will find that the Mavic may be more suited because it's better at maintaining a fixed altitude and speed, and can fly lower than most other aircraft.

Some mapping done with my Mavic
 

Sencorp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
70
Reaction score
57
Age
47
Loc
New Zealand
A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)
Actually multi-rotor may be more tedious to do mapping with. And depending on the mission, in some cases fixed wing is better. But understand that for a long time now, this has been done. First by satellites and aircraft, and now by UAS. The beauty of doing it with a multi is that you can fly the mission at various heights, and with the right data software can get an incredible result that is impossible by fixed wing.

For example. I can fly a mission then, take some time to do some close up captures of a structure or the whole area. When this renders, the image quality is superb. As for accuracy, I did a scan of a near by Rugby field, and then used the measure tool to determine if the area scale was correct. I calculated that it was off by 20mm. And in residential property, if I get really good shots of a back yard pool, I can tell you the volume of said pool as well.
So the age old debate if fixed wing is better then multi, the answer is yes, and no. Each aircraft is mission specific. Vast large area for 3D map only and low rez NDVI scan. Fixed wing. For detailed data analysis and comprehensive data collection, multi rotor all the way.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ed_2020

Sencorp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
70
Reaction score
57
Age
47
Loc
New Zealand
For those interested. Here are the low rez 3D prints of the scan.
This can give you a fair good idea of the quality of the scan. This was done using only 36 photos. If I had spent a fair amount of time getting better shots of the trees and fencing it would have been a much more sharp print.
I do find it funny though that it even printed the sheep in the field. Just two,


IMAG1498.jpg IMAG1499.jpg IMAG1500.jpg IMAG1501.jpg
 

Ed_2020

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
46
Reaction score
17
Age
50
Actually multi-rotor may be more tedious to do mapping with. And depending on the mission, in some cases fixed wing is better. But understand that for a long time now, this has been done. First by satellites and aircraft, and now by UAS. The beauty of doing it with a multi is that you can fly the mission at various heights, and with the right data software can get an incredible result that is impossible by fixed wing.

For example. I can fly a mission then, take some time to do some close up captures of a structure or the whole area. When this renders, the image quality is superb. As for accuracy, I did a scan of a near by Rugby field, and then used the measure tool to determine if the area scale was correct. I calculated that it was off by 20mm. And in residential property, if I get really good shots of a back yard pool, I can tell you the volume of said pool as well.
So the age old debate if fixed wing is better then multi, the answer is yes, and no. Each aircraft is mission specific. Vast large area for 3D map only and low rez NDVI scan. Fixed wing. For detailed data analysis and comprehensive data collection, multi rotor all the way.
Thank you for your feedback, I've being trying to create some models, achieved some reasonable quality so far, but would like to model some mountains now (around 4 km extension).

Planes seemed to be a better option, also because they are capable of more flying time, usually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sencorp

bakerboy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
298
Reaction score
92
Age
29
Since you have no GCP your results will be out by more than 20mm, you have no checks to prove your results and this will be an issue. Drone deploy/maps made easy are only as good as the info you feed in to them
 

Sencorp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
70
Reaction score
57
Age
47
Loc
New Zealand
Since you have no GCP your results will be out by more than 20mm, you have no checks to prove your results and this will be an issue. Drone deploy/maps made easy are only as good as the info you feed in to them
Your responses had me puzzled there for a moment, then I realized I have done a typo. That's supposed to be 200mm. And yes I agree with you. But like I explain to my clients that we are not doing this mapping for precise measurements, that is what ground survey crews are for, what we are doing is data gathering. So when it comes to the measurement debate it's always a mute point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oconnb910

Billabong

New Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Age
118
Greetings all.
I wanted to place a few images of the first scans using the Mavic in 3D mapping. I did a mapping of a mates new home over the weekend, and collected the following data;

  • Plant health
  • Land elevation
  • And 3D modeling
I have tons more data other then the three top categories and am in the process of 3D printing the 3D scan of the property. I would love to hear from anyone else out there that is active in mapping now, that would like to be added to the coming collaboratory that my company is developing to be part of a think tank program around this type of tech. If so, please feel free to get in touch with me.
Mate, what app/software did you use for this? I'd like to do the same at my parents Rural Property
 

bakerboy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
298
Reaction score
92
Age
29
Your responses had me puzzled there for a moment, then I realized I have done a typo. That's supposed to be 200mm. And yes I agree with you. But like I explain to my clients that we are not doing this mapping for precise measurements, that is what ground survey crews are for, what we are doing is data gathering. So when it comes to the measurement debate it's always a mute point.
You can data gather and output at a survey precision level with the use of GCP, a local surveying company does most of their surveying like this, and I have done the odd job like that too. TBH I don't see what you're bringing to the table if it's not accurate or can be used to get results from, do you do any ground sampling for the VARI plant health data? Whats the point of the DEM if you have no height checks? Contours will not be accurate if you're trying to show surface water flow etc

At the very least you can place scale bars for a greater 2D precision, just food for thought
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
59,925
Messages
699,735
Members
86,955
Latest member
DronePilotsServices