Above is an image of Brooks House. This is the house that I *attempted* to model for this lab using Scaniverse as well as MetashapePro. Below you will see my results. Please be kind.
Here, I embed the model I got from my Scaniverse scan. I started by using Polycam. This was my first mistake. After circling the house three times taking pictures and trying to figure out how to use the app, I switched to Scaniverse. I scanned the house using the “Mesh” option instead of “Splat” mode on the iPhone application. This was my second mistake. The “Mesh” option forces the user to scan from a pretty close range. Not only did the process of very intently circling and recording a house in broad daylight make me a little uncomfortable, but it also resulted in my house not having a roof because I couldn’t reach it with the mere length of my arms.
To answer the question: “Does the process of photogrammetry encourage close looking and attention to details you might otherwise have ignored?“
In my opinion, it absolutely encourages close looking and attention to detail. When scanning from an app like Scaniverse, it doesn’t matter as much. But when you look at the screenshot below of the model I made using Metashape Pro, it’s very apparent that my images were not great and needed way more attention to detail. I probably just needed a lot more photos, showing much more of the house, with more similarity among the photos. In both of my models, most of the roof is non-existent due to this lack of detail.
This model is a lot more rough looking because it was done through the photos I took (which didn’t show enough of the house)(Sorry it was really windy)
“How does attempting to model a building compare to simply viewing one through photographs or maps?”
The biggest lesson I learned transitioning from a viewer to someone actually attempting to model a house was understanding how different modeling programs work. Each program has its own “language” for how it connects pixels, photos, and points to model something, so knowing how and why they model objects the way they do is very important to mastering this field.
This reflection clearly shows how actually trying to model a building changes the way you look at it. Comparing Scaniverse and Metashape makes it obvious how much photo quality and coverage matter. The missing roof isn’t just a mistake, it shows the limits of the tools and scanning choices. I like how you point out that modeling forces you to think about how software builds objects, not just what the building looks like.
Wow, this is some incredible work Tyler! Your process and results really show how difficult modeling can be, and I too, find myself in the same boat. I also really appreciate how you walk us through these processes of yours and highlight your mistakes in these processes. Additionally, I agree with your take on attention to detail! I find that my scans could have been much better if I spent more individual time on the things I didn’t think were very important, but actually were. Very, very, well done bro!