Larger Ortho PDF Resolution


#1

Please consider making the orthomosaic PDF’s a higher resolution. Right now it seems that they are suited to 11x17 or 12x18, but we most regularly print 24x36 or 36x48 so that would be about 12-13k pixels wide. That should suffice.

Thanks!


#2

I’m not familiar with the pdf product out of DD. Can’t you simply print a high resolution pdf from the geotif at whatever size you need or is there something special about the DD’s pdfs ?


#3

The PDF Orthomosaic export is an easy way for users to quickly get the map in a familiar format. It includes north, scale and company logo preformatted.


#4

I suspect 1 sized does not fit all. A user that was forced into a 36x48 300dpi pdf when they only need letter size would be inefficient. So DD would need to offer an assortment.

It’s true that the geotifs can get unruly. Maybe a good compromise would be to include a downloadable full size ortho in jpeg. It could easily be sized to whatever is best for the use case. Adding arrows and logos, especially in apps like Revu, is trivial.


#5

I’m not quite sure why you would need a letter size print of a full map, but I get what you’re saying. The current exports seem to be suited to 11x17 or 12x18 paper so we’re not talking about a huge increase.

As for the rest, I don’t think you understood the part about pre-formatting and not having to add those things manually.


#6

Actually, an image (in a pdf) that is 36 x48 @ 300dpi is 8 times larger than a 12x18 (155,520 mpx vs 19,440 mpx)

So if the default pdf were aimed at the larger drawing size, then those using the smaller size would be carrying a lot of unneeded bulk.

I put together my own pdf reports adding both rgb orthos and elevation heatmaps along with all needed annotation and spreadsheet data fields. The high (native) resolution jpeg of the ortho is what I have found the easiest to work with and I can scale it to whatever the deliverable requires. I’m mostly doing volumetrics and not site planning.

This is not to diminish your request. I hope DD gives you the choices you need make it easier.


#7

Obviously different use-cases. The current is 72dpi at half sizes so even doubled would be 144dpi, 300dpi is unneccesary. I have a standard of data to get out and that doesn’t include “custom” reports or the time to fill out spreadsheets.


#8

Do you not have the same types annotation from one project to the other? Surely you just have all that on a layer that you can use over and over on subsequent projects without starting over each time. A logo and north arrow added to the set probably won’t slow you down !


#9

Yeah, we’re definitely not on the same page. This is all about direct user interaction. When I fly the map and present the data I want them to be able to download what they need without my interaction. This includes expecting them to use softwares outside of DroneDeploy to process their own data. Not going to happen. When you process as many maps as we do you’ll find the desire to standardize and delegate.


#10

Yep, totally different. I didn’t see where you were talking about what your clients can download rather than your needs, sorry.

I would think the best option would be for DD to scale the output based upon delivery size and not any preconceived size assumption. For example, maybe your client wants one page showing the whole property printed on 24x36 at good quality but then also wants to print just the project footprint blown-up on 24x36, also at good quality. Those 2 prints require different scaling of the orthoimage for best results. That is if DD has the option for the client to select the area of interest rather than the whole ortho.


#12

Hi @MichaelL,

Thanks for the feature request. I certainly see the need for having more pdf resolution options especially for professional user’s who may need to create bigger mock ups of their maps. I’ll pass that along!


closed #13