Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add new script reverse_markers.py #100

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jasonrmh
Copy link
Contributor

This script will reverse the current marker selection.

@PolarNick239
Copy link
Member

Hello!

In which cases it is convenient to reverse markers selection? I would like to understand how often this can happen to other users.

P.S. Sorry for the long reply.

@jasonrmh
Copy link
Contributor Author

jasonrmh commented Oct 14, 2024

My use for this script was so that I could select markers for GCP's, then mark remaining markers for use as check points.
Example:
I have 10 markers.
I select 5 to use as CGP's. I mark photos for each marker.
I then reverse markers, which means now the check point markers are selected.
I can now mark photos in the remaining 5 markers.
Now I can reverse markers again, leaving GCP markers selected to continue processing, check accuracy etc.

Hope that makes sense?

@PolarNick239
Copy link
Member

I have 10 markers.
I select 5 to use as CGP's. I mark photos for each marker.
I then reverse markers, which means now the check point markers are selected.
I can now mark photos in the remaining 5 markers.

Hmm, but can't the same thing be achieved in a simpler way? F.e.:

  1. Create 10 markers
  2. Place their projections in all photos
  3. And then select 5 GCPs from them

How does enabling/disabling markers affect the placement of marker projections in photos? Aren't they independent?

@jasonrmh
Copy link
Contributor Author

After importing reference file, I will de select markers to use as checkpoint, mark photos for GCP's, update transformations.
I then reverse markers, allow me to mark photos for the markers I want to use as check points, but I do not update transform based on check points.
You can't mark photos unless a marker is selected.

For checkpoints, I do not update transformation, to ensure they are truly independant and giving me a more realistic accuracy value.

So to recap with a bit more detail:

  • Import references
  • I have 10 markers (all selected by default)
  • I de select 5 to use as check points.
  • I mark photos for each selected marker (GCPs).
  • Update transform after I have completed marking photos for a single marker.
  • I then reverse markers, which means now the check point markers are selected.
  • I can now mark photos in the remaining 5 markers.
  • Now I can reverse markers again, leaving GCP markers selected to continue processing, check accuracy etc.

If I didnt have my script, on sites where I have 10 - 20 GCP's, I would have to manually select / deselect markers when switching from marking GCP's / Checkpoints. With the script its a single click of the menu, regardless of how many markers I have.

This the the workflow I am following from this video, which prompted me to create the script, to save time selecting deselecting markers.
https://youtu.be/ytvc0euMeKM?si=Dvgk4wiBFJP7LDcS&t=558

@PolarNick239
Copy link
Member

But if I correctly understand - your workflow will also work in the following way without the script:

  1. Import references
  2. you have 10 markers (all selected by default)
  3. mark photos for all markers
  4. de select 5 to use as check points
  5. Update transform
  6. continue processing, check accuracy etc.

Am I missing something?

P.S. this is not so important, but I also don't fully understand this - You can't mark photos unless a marker is selected. - you mean that Filter Photos by Markers doesn't work if a marker is de-selected? But it works for me - I opened a random project, un-selected the marker and Filter Photos by Markers worked as expected - only relevant photos were shown in the Photos pane below.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants