Using the DJI Spark for mapping

[jefferson3]

Sorry, I completely misunderstood what you meant by .. Let me know if you have any thoughts, questions, or suggestions.
I won't make that mistake again.

No worries. Feel free to visit any time you like!

 

[Dave Pitman]

To be clear I never asked if I should. I am saying that I am testing if I can.

I am open to hear other affordable options though.

Thanks!

If you already have a Spark, then by all means go out and see what it can do. However, to be honest, you can do what you want much better and easier with a P3P for probably the same $$. Will it fit in your pocket? Nope. But the upside is probably greater than the inconvenience.

I suspect as a GIS pro you are using the best tools for the job to develop your projects. It does seem curious that you would choose to use a tool that is obviously out of it's depth as a capture device, even if it is cute and fun to fly.

 

[jefferson3]

If you already have a Spark, then by all means go out and see what it can do. However, to be honest, you can do what you want much better and easier with a P3P for probably the same $$. Will it fit in your pocket? Nope. But the upside is probably greater than the inconvenience.

I suspect as a GIS pro you are using the best tools for the job to develop your projects. It does seem curious that you would choose to use a tool that is obviously out of it's depth as a capture device, even if it is cute and fun to fly.

As a GIS professional I have found that being resourceful is an attribute that has helped me on countless occasions. Sure, having the best tools would help, but I have also dealt with lean budgets, non-technical upper management, and the need to always solve problems.

<sarcasm> I never really thought that I would have to deal with so much negativity on the internet </sarcasm>, but I really kind of did think that people on a "professionals" forum would at least be able to comprehend the idea.

To be fair, at least you did offer up a concrete suggestion with the Phantom 3. But as stated, the entire point of this is that I have the Spark and it has the capability, so therefore I plan on testing it. If you are curious as to how things turn out feel free to follow along, and if it doesn't work out I am sure I am building up a resounding chorus of "I told you so's" from people like yourself, which I am ok with, but at least give me a chance to fail. ;-)

All I can hope is that people can choose to think independently and not be bogged down by what people (and industry) tell them is acceptable.

 

[Dave Pitman]

@jefferson3 No negativity intended. I said clearly that if you have a Spark already, then great, go after it. However, you posted on a public forum where there are guys that have been doing this for years in some cases and asked for opinions. I'm not sure what you expected?

I am very acquainted with trying to do as much with as little just like you, I assure you. That is why I mentioned the P3P as a tool that though costing no more than a Spark would perform the task much better.

What you choose to do with opinions shared here is entirely up to you. But please don't be offended when you ask for opinions and when given don't all align with what you want to hear.

Have fun!

 

[Tim Jones]

You should use the selfie drone for what it's good for.
The Spark makes a great toy and selfie shooter but it's just not equipped for mapping.
The range alone would limit you to small sites, if you could run mapping software.
You mention waypoint software but you don't use waypoint software to generate maps.
You need one of the mapping programs like DroneDeploy.

Raw images aren't necessary to create good orthophotos.
You can't write such large files at the speed you would have to fly and since the overlapped images are put through a blender to create an orthophoto raw images would be wasted anyway.

I tend to agree, the best mapping drones are specifically set up for that.
You do not even really need a gimbal for mapping, or if you do a servo two axis. Since the goal is consistent photos typically straight down I would use a heavier more wind resistant rig outfitted with a good RTK gps and proper tagging software

 

[jefferson3]

@jefferson3 No negativity intended. I said clearly that if you have a Spark already, then great, go after it. However, you posted on a public forum where there are guys that have been doing this for years in some cases and asked for opinions. I'm not sure what you expected?

I am very acquainted with trying to do as much with as little just like you, I assure you. That is why I mentioned the P3P as a tool that though costing no more than a Spark would perform the task much better.

What you choose to do with opinions shared here is entirely up to you. But please don't be offended when you ask for opinions and when given don't all align with what you want to hear.

Have fun!

Dave, I am not offended (maybe a little peeved), but mainly I'm just trying to stay on topic since it was a topic that I actually brought up. As mentioned before, I expect this forum to be full of people who know what they are talking about, and that is why it is frustrating when someone starts a "suggestion" outside the scope of the conversation. I will give an example I saw recently that seems relevant.

A guy on a truck forum says "I only have enough money for one set of tires and need to know what are the best snow performing tires I can keep on all year for my vehicle?"

One of the first replies (and the majority of the thread) was, "your vehicle isn't well suited to the snow, based on my experience you should buy a dedicated winter truck with the following attributes...."​

Now, while the guy gave an opinion based on experience, was that a worthwhile contribution to tell the OP to buy another vehicle if he can't even afford two sets of tires? In my opinion, no. The smart thing to do would be to ignore that post and just continue on with life, but given this is my thread I would much rather attempt to steer it back to what it was intended to be.

If I have to quote Dr. Evil then I wlll:

"You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!"​

In that vein all I want to do is to attempt flying a Spark for aerial mapping. Doesn't seem like there is that much room for interpretation on the kinds of "suggestions" I'm looking for on the matter.

I think this will be the last time I try to defend myself to people wondering out loud about how it's a bad idea. If you want to talk constructively then stay tuned, otherwise feel free to unsubscribe to the thread. It's freezing outside, so once things thaw out we might actually have something of substance to talk about!

 

[jefferson3]

I tend to agree, the best mapping drones are specifically set up for that.
You do not even really need a gimbal for mapping, or if you do a servo two axis. Since the goal is consistent photos typically straight down I would use a heavier more wind resistant rig outfitted with a good RTK gps and proper tagging software

So if you agree with that then that would mean you disagree with the entire premise of this thread. To that I just ask, why are you here?

 

[Tim Jones]

my apologies, I appear to have offended you, I read a post and was replying to it.
No problem I will leave the discussion

 

[Dave Pitman]

I think this will be the last time I try to defend myself to people wondering out loud about how it's a bad idea. If you want to talk constructively then stay tuned, otherwise feel free to unsubscribe to the thread. It's freezing outside, so once things thaw out we might actually have something of substance to talk about!

Jeff, the critical things needed for a good image set to be churned into an orthoimage regardless of the platform are these:

• Good even lighting with as little shadow as possible. Thin overcast at noon is best.
• The grid is flown at a height (agl) that is high enough to allow each photograph enough overlap so it is able to be processed without having the UAV travel too slowly. But low enough to give you the ground detail you are after. This is dependent on the type of terrain, vegetation, camera FOV, lighting, etc. The capture apps make this calculation easier, but if the Spark is not supported you can figure this out manually but it takes more work.
• The layout of image capture is sufficient to provide the detail and overlap needed for the set to be processed into an ortho image. This is where the capture apps shine. If you can't find an app that supports the Spark, but you can find a way to set waypoints, you will need to find a flight speed and interval camera trigger setting that will give you the image set you're after flying between the waypoints. If it is a small area, you can try and wing it and capture images manually by what you are looking at on screen. But it is very difficult to get a decent set this way other than just a small area.

 

[jefferson3]

Jeff, the critical things needed for a good image set to be churned into an orthoimage regardless of the platform are these:

• Good even lighting with as little shadow as possible. Thin overcast at noon is best.
• The grid is flown at a height (agl) that is high enough to allow each photograph enough overlap so it is able to be processed without having the UAV travel too slowly. But low enough to give you the ground detail you are after. This is dependent on the type of terrain, vegetation, camera FOV, lighting, etc. The capture apps make this calculation easier, but if the Spark is not supported you can figure this out manually but it takes more work.
• The layout of image capture is sufficient to provide the detail and overlap needed for the set to be processed into an ortho image. This is where the capture apps shine. If you can't find an app that supports the Spark, but you can find a way to set waypoints, you will need to find a flight speed and interval camera trigger setting that will give you the image set you're after. If it is a small area, you can try and wing it and capture images manually by what you are looking at on screen. But it is very difficult to get a decent set this way other than just a small area.

Yes, these are the things I am looking to see how the Spark handles. I have found software that looks to do waypoints and camera control so it will take the pictures when and where I need it to. That was my main concern as the flight path and photo locations can all be done like you said, with the camera FOV specs, desired overlap, and coverage area.

I understand that the process of mission planning -> flight -> data processing used to be fairly difficult but it looks like there are a lot of options out there now. Also, and I cannot stress this enough, this was never intended to match the quality of data coming from a purpose-built quad/hex/octo. So any product that is "usable" would be a win in my eyes.

The software is getting more and more advanced and I have high hopes with Esri's Drone2Map product in creating ortho's and maybe even rudimentary point clouds and 3D models. This could be misguided, but I won't know until I try!

 

[Curtis Tyler]

I used the Spark to generate an ortho of an archaeological site I manually flew and took the pictures due to size and portability, the P4 was too big for the trip.

 

[jefferson3]

I used the Spark to generate an ortho of an archaeological site I manually flew and took the pictures due to size and portability, the P4 was too big for the trip.

Good deal! I'm happy to hear of other people doing this. Other than flying manually like you mentioned, what limitations and issues did you have with the workflow to get a final product?

 

[Curtis Tyler]

It was actually quite convenient since I wasn't sure I could fly at all considering the sensitivity of the subject. I guess the most limiting factor was battery life. during the flight, I wasn't sure how the "obliqueness" of the camera was going to work, but there were no issues stitching them. all in all it was a success. Given the option, I would rather map with the P4, I'm holding out on the P4P because I am hopeful the next one will have RTK, but, for a convenient solution, it worked well.

 

[jefferson3]

It was actually quite convenient since I wasn't sure I could fly at all considering the sensitivity of the subject. I guess the most limiting factor was battery life. during the flight, I wasn't sure how the "obliqueness" of the camera was going to work, but there were no issues stitching them. all in all it was a success. Given the option, I would rather map with the P4, I'm holding out on the P4P because I am hopeful the next one will have RTK, but, for a convenient solution, it worked well.

Convenience seems to be one of the best things about the Spark for sure.

 

[beachcombing]

So if you agree with that then that would mean you disagree with the entire premise of this thread. To that I just ask, why are you here?

jefferson3, you might want to dial back the negativity and defensiveness. You have already alienated several very experienced drone users and pilots who have tried to offer constructive suggestion which is what you asked for in your OP. Just because they are saying what you are proposing probably not a great idea and will likely not produce the results you are looking for doesn't mean that their contributions are not valid and appropriate for the thread. You might be right or you might be wrong in your idea but that doesn't make their posts any less appropriate for the thread.

 

[Meta4]

I used the Spark to generate an ortho of an archaeological site

How big was the site you flew?

I'm holding out on the P4P because I am hopeful the next one will have RTK, but, for a convenient solution, it worked well.

RTK will not be part of any consumer-grade Phantom in the near future.
It's much too expensive and unnecessary for the majority of users.
It will only be a an expensive specialist variant for users requiring greater accuracy and prepared to pay for it.
DJI confirms Phantom 4 Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) drone
DJI Phantom 4 avec récepteur GPS RTK ?

 

[jefferson3]

jefferson3, you might want to dial back the negativity and defensiveness. You have already alienated several very experienced drone users and pilots who have tried to offer constructive suggestion which is what you asked for in your OP. Just because they are saying what you are proposing probably not a great idea and will likely not produce the results you are looking for doesn't mean that their contributions are not valid and appropriate for the thread. You might be right or you might be wrong in your idea but that doesn't make their posts any less appropriate for the thread.

I'd just like to point out the irony of you calling out me for calling out others for "non-appropriate" posts. Isn't the internet wonderful?

People keep telling me to not be offended for multiple posts harping on the same argument (that the Spark wasn't built for this so why bother) so then they too can not be offended when I tell them that this point of view (and redundancy) is not helpful for the discussion. The main problem right now is that this forum is brand new and therefore there aren't that many topics (plus a contest that has people vying for higher post counts), this seems to make people just comment on what they see even if they don't really need to say it.

I'd like to be an active member of this budding industry that is of interest to me and my job so hopefully people won't completely write me off for voicing my opinion of their opinion.

 

[Dave Pitman]

I'm holding out on the P4P because I am hopeful the next one will have RTK

Hey Curtis. In addition to what meta4 said, many don't understand that DJI's implementation of "RTK" on the M200 and M600 is not RTK with regard to improvement of capability for mapping and survey. It is RTK added precision for navigation. There is a huge difference. RTK sounds really good on the marketing though. And it does improve control when near obstacles which is the goal of RTK navigation.

You can get precision gnss add-ons for the Phantom 4 Pro, Inspire 2 and M200 now that will enable precision image capture data for PPK. They will run you about $6k.

 

[Curtis Tyler]

1. How big was the site you flew?

Not very, approximately 3 acres.
2.

DJI confirms Phantom 4 Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) drone

That's the article that gave me hope.

 

[Meta4]

I'd just like to point out the irony of you calling out me for calling out others for "non-appropriate" posts. Isn't the internet wonderful?

Irony?
Perhaps it would help if you went back to your initial post and change Let me know if you have any thoughts, questions, or suggestions to something that better fits what you want to get from people (and what you don't).
Because as it is now, it appears to most readers that you are asking for any thoughts, questions, or suggestions that people may have but your subsequent posting says something different.