wpqjbzwm wrote:Hi, @uasghar.
For bare-earth extraction, there is another option. You may try new CSF plugin. (see http://www.danielgm.net/cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1724)
Hope to see your comparison of qCANUPO and CSF. I guess qCANUPO should be better, because it uses more information to classify ground and non-ground points. But CSF will be easier to use.

I tested your plugin today on Photogrammetrically point cloud consisting of over 80 million points, and I must thank you that it worked better than my expectations, for very irregular surfaces (e.g. erosion gullies with very sharp spikes) it CSF performed very well. However, the settings I used were 0.2, 800, and 0.5 (with both steep slope options checked). I actually moved step by step from cloth resolution of 1 to 0.1 while keeping all other values constant, and until 0.2 my bare-earth model constantly improved. However, when I changed from 0.2 to 0.1, my bare-earth model had less points (especially in areas with erosion gullies), what I got for 0.2. Do you know if there's any specific reason behind that?

and thanks again for your plugin.

Regards,

Umair.