Problem with Pix4dMapper

[jjdun770]

Not sure what I'm doing wrong with this **** software but it's got me ready to pull every single one of the hairs I have left out lol. Let me first say I'm new and more than anything just practicing trying to become more proficient (trying to use the Covid19 lockdown time wisely to become as knowledgeable as possible at aerial mapping lol). I fly a P4P v1 and have currently been using DD to fly the mission and collect the data but have been using Pix4dmapper to process the images (not sure if that makes a difference or not, I can switch to Pix4dcapture if needed but have so far had good luck DD flying the missions and kinda reluctant to change unless I really need to). I've kept the front and side overlap to 80 degrees flying @9pmh at an altitude of 170ft but keep getting "Error e0046 Processing Failed. No calibrated cameras". I've researched the error and it's basically a list of a bunch of different possibilities so I really don't know where to start. Please help lol.

PS
Not sure if it's needed but my processing rig is a Dell 990 i5 @3.10ghz with 16gb RAM with a 250gb ssd and a geforce 710 gpu.

 

[Dave Pitman]

Control app should make no difference.

You are not editing or opening the image files in any other app prior to ingesting them into P4d are you? Can you share a half dozen of your images? You can pm a link to me if you wish.

 

[jjdun770]

Didn't think the flight app would make a difference but figured it was worth asking since I'm stuck like chuck. Not touching the pics at all just straight from the SD card into Pix4d. Attached a half dozen pics below (just a set of my apartment complex I was using to practice with).
Thank you for the help.

 

[Dave Pitman]

Those images loaded just fine into Pix4D Mapper for me, so I don't know why it's having an issue on your end. Reach out to Pix4D support.

 

[jjdun770]

I figured out what the problem is but Im still not quite sure how to fix it. I had it setup to use my SSD to store the images I'd captured thinking that was the correct (fastest) way to do it but it doesn't like that setup for some reason. I changed the storage location from C:\ (SSD) to D:\ (1TB HDD) and it liked that setup better for some reason and is back to processing normally again albeit slower. Any idea why that would be?
Thanks

 

[Dave Pitman]

I'm not sure how that could be making any difference really. If P4D sees the images, it shouldn't matter the type of drive so long as it actually sees them. Ingesting the images will not be the bottleneck in the process regardless of the drive type. FWIW, I used my laptop which only has an SSD. But I can also pull the images straight from the micro sd card without issue.

 

[R Martin]

I figured out what the problem is but Im still not quite sure how to fix it. I had it setup to use my SSD to store the images I'd captured thinking that was the correct (fastest) way to do it but it doesn't like that setup for some reason. I changed the storage location from C:\ (SSD) to D:\ (1TB HDD) and it liked that setup better for some reason and is back to processing normally again albeit slower. Any idea why that would be?
Thanks

I use an Alienware to process my imagery. Pix4D is installed on the C: (root) directory on the SSD. I copy all of my images onto the SSD and dump them in a folder to process them, doing all the work on the SSD and then copy all the files onto a network drive afterwards to store them. After validating that everything transferred, I wipe the mission data and files off the SSD. This provides the fastest processing time (so far) without any trouble (so far).

 

[jjdun770]

I use an Alienware to process my imagery. Pix4D is installed on the C: (root) directory on the SSD. I copy all of my images onto the SSD and dump them in a folder to process them, doing all the work on the SSD and then copy all the files onto a network drive afterwards to store them. After validating that everything transferred, I wipe the mission data and files off the SSD. This provides the fastest processing time (so far) without any trouble (so far).

Definitely not stored in the root directory, Ive got a Pix4d directory with sub-directories for each project that i wipe after i transfer to my network drive after processing trying to preserve as much space as possible on my SSD (only 250 gb). I'm not sure exactly whats going on with it but I'll get it figured out. I'm just glad I've got everything back working again for the most part lol.

 

[R Martin]

Definitely not stored in the root directory, Ive got a Pix4d directory with sub-directories for each project that i wipe after i transfer to my network drive after processing trying to preserve as much space as possible on my SSD (only 250 gb). I'm not sure exactly whats going on with it but I'll get it figured out. I'm just glad I've got everything back working again for the most part lol.

Having Pix4D installed on and working on the SSD will definitely speed things up. Loading the imagery onto the SSD saved me about 45 minutes of processing on a 5500 image (14-18GB ea) test case. I tried it off a network drive and then again on the SSD. For smaller jobs the time savings is not going to be that great and honestly, 45 minutes is not that much in the grand scheme of things. Compared to the old Dell workstation (8 days + vs 33ish hours) the new PC smokes.

 

[jjdun770]

Having Pix4D installed on and working on the SSD will definitely speed things up. Loading the imagery onto the SSD saved me about 45 minutes of processing on a 5500 image (14-18GB ea) test case. I tried it off a network drive and then again on the SSD. For smaller jobs the time savings is not going to be that great and honestly, 45 minutes is not that much in the grand scheme of things. Compared to the old Dell workstation (8 days + vs 33ish hours) the new PC smokes.

What kind of processing rig are you running if you don't mind me asking?

 

[R Martin]

What kind of processing rig are you running if you don't mind me asking?

AMD Ryzen, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and I forget the graphics card. A 2710 sounds right but I'd have to check the paperwork.

 

[Dave Pitman]

Ingesting the images will not be the bottleneck in the process regardless of the drive type.

For smaller jobs the time savings is not going to be that great and honestly, 45 minutes is not that much in the grand scheme of things.

Yup, that is correct, I agree. 5 minutes savings on a typical 500 image set project, meh. Saving an hour on a 33 hour processed project, probably worth the trouble to load onto the ssd first. Certainly nothing to get excited about though!

 

[Dave Pitman]

AMD Ryzen, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and I forget the graphics card. A 2710 sounds right but I'd have to check the paperwork.

Gotta love that core count!

 

[jjdun770]

AMD Ryzen, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and I forget the graphics card. A 2710 sounds right but I'd have to check the paperwork.

**** that does sound like a straight up BADASS..... From what ive heard those new AMD Threadripper processors are supposed to be game changing. Less expensive than Intels i9 processors and faster to boot lol. When i upgraded to the rig I have now my old rig became a project, im definitely gonna go the AMD Threadripper route on the processor this time with a motherboard that accepts at least 32 gigs or RAM but id like the option to upgrade it to 64 down the road. For the sake of just getting it up and running im gonna use the GEForce 710 graphics card ive got already and upgrade that down the line (not sure how much the GPU really helps in terms of processing anyway), If im wrong somebody please let me know so i can start pricing a better option. I figure if im taking the time to build it might as well do it the right way lol. If you dont mind me asking how much did the laptop you're running set you back? Thanks for the help......

Jody

 

[Dave Pitman]

You could have a read of the following articles. I think they are a year or 2 old, so don't address Threadripper, but I think we understand the performance gain there.

You'll notice that "Hard Disk" performance is not critical for Step 1 which includes ingesting the source images. So, loading from a non-ssd is not critical. Having P4D run and cache files on a fast drive is another story and definitely makes a difference.

Hardware components usage when processing with Pix4Dmapper

Information: For more information about the use of the GPU: Use of the GPU in Pix4Dmapper. For recommendations for a Hardware and Software Configuration: How to decide which hardware to buy. Fo...

support.pix4d.com

Hardware case study

This article explains the use of key computer components by Pix4Dmapper. A series of experiments has been performed to determine the impact of hardware configuration as a function of input images a...

support.pix4d.com

 

[jjdun770]

You could have a read of the following articles. I think they are a year or 2 old, so don't address Threadripper, but I think we understand the performance gain there.

You'll notice that "Hard Disk" performance is not critical for Step 1 which includes ingesting the source images. So, loading from a non-ssd is not critical. Having P4D run and cache files on a fast drive is another story and definitely makes a difference.

Hardware components usage when processing with Pix4Dmapper

Information: For more information about the use of the GPU: Use of the GPU in Pix4Dmapper. For recommendations for a Hardware and Software Configuration: How to decide which hardware to buy. Fo...

support.pix4d.com

Hardware case study

This article explains the use of key computer components by Pix4Dmapper. A series of experiments has been performed to determine the impact of hardware configuration as a function of input images a...

support.pix4d.com

Thank you for the info sir..... I'm like a sponge right now with this photogrammetry stuff. Trying to soak up as much knowledge as possible so that one day i might also sound knowledgeable when discussing it lol. Thanks also to everyone that assisted. The knowledge base here and general helpfulness of the group makes learning this stuff a whole lot easier.
Regards,

Jody

 

[R Martin]

Gotta love that core count!

For the work we do, it was night and day. But the old Dell worked great for the jobs we gathered with the Inspire. Going from a 12mp to a 42mp camera, and the dramatic increase in image count made it necessary to find another processing solution. Its just a question of scale. I didn't have a real choice in the matter. I needed the data in a reasonable amount of time instead of waiting for a week or more for one days answers.

 

[R Martin]

**** that does sound like a straight up BADASS..... From what ive heard those new AMD Threadripper processors are supposed to be game changing. Less expensive than Intels i9 processors and faster to boot lol. When i upgraded to the rig I have now my old rig became a project, im definitely gonna go the AMD Threadripper route on the processor this time with a motherboard that accepts at least 32 gigs or RAM but id like the option to upgrade it to 64 down the road. For the sake of just getting it up and running im gonna use the GEForce 710 graphics card ive got already and upgrade that down the line (not sure how much the GPU really helps in terms of processing anyway), If im wrong somebody please let me know so i can start pricing a better option. I figure if im taking the time to build it might as well do it the right way lol. If you dont mind me asking how much did the laptop you're running set you back? Thanks for the help......

Jody

Its a full-blown water cooled PC and its monstrous in size. With a government discount we shelled out $4400.00 for it. I personally would love to have one but on a government salary, wish in one hand type of thing.

 

[R Martin]

When i upgraded to the rig I have now my old rig became a project, im definitely gonna go the AMD Threadripper route on the processor this time with a motherboard that accepts at least 32 gigs or RAM but id like the option to upgrade it to 64 down the road. For the sake of just getting it up and running im gonna use the GEForce 710 graphics card ive got already and upgrade that down the line (not sure how much the GPU really helps in terms of processing anyway)

Make sure you meet the hardware and system requirements and fall in-between the minimum and maximum suggestions.
Hardware Requirements
We went for a top-end system but you need to tailor a solution based upon your needs. If you are running smaller jobs (under a couple hundred images less than 20MP) then you don't need to break the bank on hardware.

 

[R Martin]

Yup, that is correct, I agree. 5 minutes savings on a typical 500 image set project, meh. Saving an hour on a 33 hour processed project, probably worth the trouble to load onto the ssd first. Certainly nothing to get excited about though!

Agreed. Transferring them onto the SSD takes at least a quarter of the savings if not more. But I do like working exclusively on the SSD for processing.