Photogrammetry Project Readiness Checklist for Agisoft Metashape

Start with the purpose of the project, not with the processing settings.

• What operational, scientific, engineering or documentation decision must the project support?
• Which outputs are required: referenced point cloud, mesh, textured model, orthomosaic, DSM, DTM, contours, measurements or reports?
• What ground resolution, model detail or measurement capability is actually required?
• Is absolute accuracy required, or is relative geometry sufficient?
• Which output coordinate system, units, file formats and delivery platforms are required?
• What area, object, time period or change must be documented?
• Who will review and accept the final deliverables?
• Which acceptance criteria will determine whether the project is complete?

Readiness evidence: a written project brief listing deliverables, required accuracy, coordinate system, resolution, formats and acceptance criteria.

Verify whether the source imagery can support the expected result.

• How many images are included and what is their resolution and file format?
• Which cameras, lenses, focal lengths or sensors were used?
• Are the images nadir, oblique, terrestrial or a combination of capture geometries?
• Is forward and side overlap sufficient and reasonably consistent?
• Are there missing flight lines, gaps, occlusions or poorly observed surfaces?
• Are focus, shutter speed, exposure and motion blur acceptable across the dataset?
• Are timestamps, GNSS coordinates, orientation data and camera metadata intact?
• Does the dataset combine several flights, dates, altitudes, cameras or environmental conditions?
• Are duplicate, corrupted or irrelevant images present?
• Do data ownership and usage permissions allow processing and publication?

Readiness evidence: an image-quality audit and a documented inventory of sensors, flights, metadata, coverage and known limitations.

Separate information used to control the project from information used to validate it.

• Are camera coordinates autonomous GNSS, RTK, PPK or derived from another system?
• Are position accuracies known and assigned realistically?
• Are Ground Control Points available and were they surveyed with an appropriate method?
• Are control points clearly identifiable in the images?
• Are checkpoints reserved for independent validation rather than used in the adjustment?
• Are control points and checkpoints distributed across the full site and elevation range?
• Are marker coordinates, units, point identifiers and accuracy values consistent?
• Is there an external survey specification or tolerance that must be satisfied?
• Will the final report distinguish reprojection error, control residuals and checkpoint error?

Readiness evidence: a reference-data plan identifying camera accuracy, control points, independent checkpoints and acceptance tolerances.

Coordinate-system problems can produce plausible-looking but unusable results.

• What is the source horizontal coordinate reference system?
• What is the required project and delivery coordinate reference system?
• Is the relevant EPSG code known and appropriate for the project area?
• Are heights ellipsoidal, orthometric or referenced to a local datum?
• Is a geoid model or vertical transformation required?
• Are all coordinates expressed in compatible units and axis order?
• Do camera coordinates, GCPs, checkpoints and expected outputs use compatible reference definitions?
• Has a known point been checked after transformation?
• Will the CRS, transformation and height convention be documented in the final delivery?

Readiness evidence: a documented source, project and output CRS, including vertical datum, units and required transformation resources.

Plan for input data, working files, intermediate products and final deliverables.

• What is the total image count, resolution and source-data size?
• How much system RAM and GPU memory is available?
• Which CPU and GPU will perform the workload and are drivers current?
• Is fast local SSD or NVMe storage available for active processing?
• How much free working space is available beyond the source dataset?
• Will network-attached storage introduce a throughput or reliability limitation?
• Where will backups, project versions and exported products be stored?
• Can a representative subset be processed before committing the full dataset?
• Is a single workstation sufficient, or should network processing be evaluated?
• Who is responsible for monitoring storage, failed tasks and recovery?

Readiness evidence: a documented hardware and storage plan supported by a representative test where project scale or output demand is uncertain.

Confirm that the selected environment supports the required functions and number of users.

• Which Agisoft Metashape functions are required by the expected workflow?
• Does the project require Professional-specific georeferencing, measurement or geospatial outputs?
• Which operating system and Metashape version will be used?
• Is a Node-Locked or, where applicable, Floating configuration more appropriate?
• How many simultaneous users or processing clients are required?
• Will the software operate on a workstation, server, secure network or offline environment?
• Does the organization need centralized license availability or transfer between workstations?
• Is network processing planned, and have client, node and shared-storage roles been defined?
• Have activation, firewall, update and support requirements been reviewed?
• Has the deployment been tested before the production schedule begins?

Readiness evidence: a licensing and deployment plan aligned with the required functions, users, devices, network and security constraints.

Approve each critical stage before starting the next expensive operation.

• How will images, calibration groups, flights and sensors be organized?
• Which alignment strategy will be tested first and why?
• Will a representative area be used to evaluate settings and resource demand?
• How will weak connections, unaligned cameras and poor tie-point distribution be identified?
• When will camera calibration and reference accuracy be reviewed?
• What conditions must be satisfied before generating depth maps, point clouds, DEMs, orthomosaics or models?
• Will the project be processed as one coherent block or divided into chunks?
• How will classification, masking, cleaning and manual edits be documented?
• Which intermediate products must be retained for recovery or audit?
• Who approves each quality gate?

Readiness evidence: a staged workflow with explicit review points after data import, alignment, reference optimization and each final-product stage.

A professional result should remain understandable after the project has been delivered.

• Which outputs, file formats, resolutions, units and coordinate systems will be delivered?
• Will the processing report and accuracy information accompany the results?
• Will control and checkpoint statistics be presented separately?
• Are naming conventions and version numbers defined?
• Which source images, project files, intermediate data and exports must be archived?
• Are software version, processing settings and manual interventions documented?
• How will large files be transferred securely to the recipient?
• Are confidentiality, retention and deletion requirements defined?
• Can another qualified operator understand how the outputs were produced?
• Who provides final technical approval?

Readiness evidence: a delivery and archive specification that preserves the context, quality information and reproducibility of the project.