Thanks for a thoroughly and very interesting video! I'm a newbie in mapping, is there any difference in accuracy using this "set up" (RTK) or doing the same mission with GCPs?
I always use GCP's even when flying with RTK. When flying RTK, you do have very good positional accuracy with each photo. When you fly with NON rtk, the EXIF position is generally way off (by 1-10 meters). So when you use GCP's your final product will be very accurate at the GCP's but it will drift in accuracy as you move further away from them. It is now so easy and practical to fly using RTK that I don't fly any flights without it. And yet I still have GCP's and checkpoints to use in addition to the drone RTK. The ground shots done with a GNSS Rover should definitely be the most accurate if comparing the drone to your GNSS Rover (if done correctly). It is however, amazing that the RTK data alone can be so dang accurate without the use of GCPs. But the only way you verify that is with quite a few checkpoints. Hope that helps.
Hey Tim, appreciate all you do here. I do have a question about establishing your base point. Is this a viable alternative to Establishing a "Known Point" with rinex/OPUS solution?
I would establish a BASE point with either OPUS or State RTK. But if all you want is to create a 3D model, and absolute accuracy on your location does not matter, then you can use a "single Solution" for your BASE point. Even when you use a "single solution" (times when you have no access to RTK and you don't have a known benchmark), you can always shift your data later after you upload your BASE Rinex file to OPUS and get accurate coordinates. Hope that helps.
@@DroneMappingTools Thanks for clearing that up for me. It makes total sense doing it that way. Thanks for the clarification and all you do. Coming to Denver for GeoWeek? See you there if you are.
Great, thanks Tim!
You are the man!
good evening! bravo, nice - 🤙
Thanks for a thoroughly and very interesting video! I'm a newbie in mapping, is there any difference in accuracy using this "set up" (RTK) or doing the same mission with GCPs?
I always use GCP's even when flying with RTK. When flying RTK, you do have very good positional accuracy with each photo. When you fly with NON rtk, the EXIF position is generally way off (by 1-10 meters). So when you use GCP's your final product will be very accurate at the GCP's but it will drift in accuracy as you move further away from them. It is now so easy and practical to fly using RTK that I don't fly any flights without it. And yet I still have GCP's and checkpoints to use in addition to the drone RTK. The ground shots done with a GNSS Rover should definitely be the most accurate if comparing the drone to your GNSS Rover (if done correctly). It is however, amazing that the RTK data alone can be so dang accurate without the use of GCPs. But the only way you verify that is with quite a few checkpoints. Hope that helps.
@@DroneMappingTools Thanks for the answer, I think I understood ;-)
@@DroneMappingTools Have you uploaded the 3D-model you did for the architect firm?
Hey Tim, appreciate all you do here. I do have a question about establishing your base point. Is this a viable alternative to Establishing a "Known Point" with rinex/OPUS solution?
I would establish a BASE point with either OPUS or State RTK. But if all you want is to create a 3D model, and absolute accuracy on your location does not matter, then you can use a "single Solution" for your BASE point. Even when you use a "single solution" (times when you have no access to RTK and you don't have a known benchmark), you can always shift your data later after you upload your BASE Rinex file to OPUS and get accurate coordinates. Hope that helps.
@@DroneMappingTools Thanks for clearing that up for me. It makes total sense doing it that way. Thanks for the clarification and all you do. Coming to Denver for GeoWeek? See you there if you are.
Great stuff!