|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | GISList: Re: Definiens 'eCognition' software? |
| Date: |
06/27/2002 11:50:11 AM |
| From: |
David Burnham |
|
|
In answer to your questions about eCognition, I feel I know a lot about the
subject, and the following are my opinions:
You are correct that the 'eCognition' software is useful and revolutionary:
however, in its most positive light, I believe it is the second best feature
extraction software. The best, hands down, is Feature Analyst
(www.featureanalyst.com). This software came out in Beta mode less than a
year ago (a little shakey at the start), but the current version is awesome.
I saw the preliminary NIMA Pathfinder results for all image processing and
GIS systems, and Feature Analyst was 3rd, while eCognition was rated 32nd.
These are the two best pieces of software for "feature extraction" (as other
systems such as IMAGINE, ranked number 1, cover a wider array of
image-processing and problem solving, but lack in feature extraction). This
ranking tells it all. I've been using Feature Analyst since the beginning
and it has saved me considerable time and money. The eCognition software
has been a long learning curve for me, and I still can't get the same
results I immediately got with Feature Analyst.
A quick summary of benefits, from my perspective:
* Cost: Feature Analyst is about half the cost of eCognition. Feature
Analyst also has a lease option that keeps the price down even lower.
* Ease-of-use: Not even close, with Feature Analyst you can extract
decent results immediately, and be more proficient in a matter of days.
eCognition may be just as powerful as Feature Analyst, but is confusing and
cumbersome. The reason is that Feature Analyst uses inductive learning
behind the scenes, and eCognition requires rule-based programming.
* Workflow: eCognition is stand-alone (yuck). Feature Analyst works as
an extension to ArcView and ArcGIS - and I understand is coming out with an
IMAGINE extension. I don't even have to leave my working environment, which
is great - plus all other tools are integrated into my workflow (such as
Stereo Analyst and Spatial Analyst).
* Accuracy: Feature Analyst appears to be much more accurate in the end
than eCognition. I'm not sure why, but I think it is because you are stuck
with the results of the unsupervised classification and can't fine-tune the
way you can with Feature Analyst.
* Imagery: Feature Analyst works well on both Panchromatic and
Multi-spectral imagery. Does eCognition even work on Pan images??
Both are object-oriented, and both have script/automated modes to run.
-Dave
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
To unsubscribe, write to gislist-unsubscribe@geocomm.com
________________________________________________________________________
Setup a GeoCommunity Account and have access to FAST DataDownloads
and Premium Career Posting at a discounted rate!
https://www.geocomm.com/cgi-bin/accounts/login
On-line Archives available at
http://spatialnews.geocomm.com/community/lists/
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
