UAV image processing with Pict'Earth
Now that we've got several UAVs running well, it's time to show what
they're good for. Aerial photography is fun, but it's not really useful
unless you can cover large areas and integrate the imagery into Google
Earth. I've been stitching together images optically and superimposing them on Google Earth,
but it takes forever, still requires a lot of hand tweaking and isn't
really well integrated into Earth. What I needed was an automated
solution, which is why I was so pleased to see the service Pict'Earth recently announced.
The image at right is one that they processed for me. I uploaded a bunch of photos taken by a camera in continuous shooting mode (it was a Canon SD650 shooting twice a second) and a GPS record of the same flight (we just put a GPS data logger onboard and downloaded the data later). The Pict'Earth software synchronizes the time stamps on the photos with the GPS records and then outputs a KML file that automatically mosaics all the photos into Google Earth. It's really quite cool.
The example shown here is a screen shot of one run over the Alameda Naval Air Station. Here's the KML file--download it and it should load automaticaly into Earth so you can see how it all works.
The Pict'Earth team is still developing the software to do this on a large scale and is working out pricing plans. They're updating their website and should have that all available there soon. In the meantime you can contact them directly here. You can also follow their progress on their Ning community site, which is well worth visiting.



What's fun about this is seeing all the model planes and folks on the tarmac - which one is you, Chris?
Posted by: Matthew Hurst | September 08, 2007 at 10:24 PM
This is excellent.
Eventually, images will stream directly over to a server. This could be approximated with a cell network and small computer connected to the camera to grab the images.
Real-time integration of images from constantly patrolling UAVs would be very useful.
Posted by: Ivan | September 10, 2007 at 08:15 AM
Chris,
This is very nice. We did something pretty similar but instead of an UAVs we used a high altitude balloon (a NASA one but it can be done on an amateur one as well). We put a Canon S3 IS camera and shot downward (instead of the usual edge-of-space photo taken by previous teams) and figured out two things:
- with a $300 point and shoot camera you can get a meter resolution on the ground for a large swath of land.
(http://hasp-geocam.blogspot.com/2006/10/comparing-satellite-imagery-and-geocam.html)
- once you have collected all these images, since the bandwidth is low, you wait for the balloon to come down (2-3 hours) and use two off the shelf softwares (autopano pro and zoomify) and produce a map. No need to import these maps in Google Earth (they can be too big), because at that point, you are the map.
Example maps we stitched (no expertise require only drag and drop) can be found here (you can zoom but this one
is 50% reduced)
http://sei.tamu.edu/geocam/Panoramas/panorama_22-23-50pct.htm
others can be found here:
http://sei.tamu.edu/geocam/pictures.htm
The reason we did this was to find out if low cost disaster response could be done and what quality of data could be produced. More can be found here:
http://sei.tamu.edu/geocam/overview.htm
Roland Piquepaille did a nice piece on us:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=446
Igor.
Posted by: Igor Carron | September 11, 2007 at 06:57 AM
Chris,
One more thing, one of the very interesting aspect of the automatic stitching I mentioned revolves around two possibilities:
- no need for GPS to match the images together, the photographs are enough.
- if you fly several UAVs at about the same height or at different times over the same area, you can merge all these images automatically (drag and drop). Here again no need for GPS information.
Igor.
Posted by: Igor Carron | September 11, 2007 at 07:15 AM
You may also be interested in this program developed at UBC. It does a great job not only of joining but also making adjustments and blending for brightness and so on.
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html
Posted by: Stephen Smith | September 11, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Stephan,
Just tried AutoStitch and I'm afraid it doesn't work well at all for linear imagery like ours. Here's an example of one such failure, on the above images. PTGui works much better for me.
Chris
Posted by: Chris Anderson | September 13, 2007 at 07:56 AM
Stephen,
The autostitch algorithm is the one that was eventually integrated in the autopano pro software. Autostitch has a lot of issues with regards to dealing with 2 GB file of image (because it was not designed to deal with that much data). The folks at Autopano worked well with us to expand the capabilities of the autostich algorithm to produce the large panorama. You should try the software as it comes as a full fledged program for free. The non free version removes the watermark on the resulting panorama.
For low level flight, there are issues but if there is enough demand, I am sure the autopano folks will improve it to allow for orthographic projections.
Igor.
Posted by: Igor Carron | September 14, 2007 at 09:13 PM
Chris,
http://www.autopano.net/download
the full version removes the watermark on the rendering (panorama in jpeg, gif.... format).
The forum is a good place to find out how to have your panorama rendered well in case you get a similar result than PTGui (http://forum.autopano.net/f10-bug-reports)
Igor.
Posted by: Igor Carron | September 15, 2007 at 05:50 AM
Hi Chris,
Sorry for this off topic post. I just finished listening to the Long Tail. The book is outstanding and it made me re-think our business model. Thank you for this book.
Regards,
Ali
Posted by: Ali Kasyr | September 17, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Lov the fact that you can take these aerial pictures with ease. but are the commercial and practical applications of these technologies even relevant?
Posted by: Sin Jin | September 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Interesting work, but I do have to wonder: why would the Alameda NAS allow UAVs to fly over? Wouldn't that seem to be a security issue?
Posted by: blooflame | September 20, 2007 at 07:31 PM
Why use a military facility to demonstrate this? Who thinks that's a good idea?
Posted by: Jeffrey | September 22, 2007 at 06:16 PM
Blooflame,
The Alameda Naval Air Station has been closed for nearly a decade. No full-scale aircraft use its airstrips today.
--Chris
Posted by: Chris Anderson | September 23, 2007 at 11:56 PM