[nsg_ai_p1]
[nsg_ai_p2]
[nsg_ai_p3]
[nsg_ai_p4]
Reality capture is better for dense visual and spatial documentation, while traditional surveying is better for defined survey products and control-based measurements. Many projects use both together so the final dataset supports design, verification, or documentation more effectively. The right choice depends on the site, the deliverables, and how the information will be used.
Timing depends on scope, site access, weather, airspace, and the deliverables requested. AMI reviews those factors during regular business hours before confirming a plan, which helps avoid unrealistic expectations. A smaller, straightforward request may move faster than a complex site with multiple collection methods or processing requirements.
Send the site location, a short description of the problem, the timeline, and the file types or deliverables you need. If you have plans, sketches, prior surveys, or access notes, those can help the team evaluate the job more efficiently. Clear preparation usually leads to a more useful scope review and quote.
Pricing depends on site size, access, collection method, processing effort, and the final deliverables. A simple documentation request will usually differ from a combined LiDAR and photogrammetry workflow with CAD or GIS outputs. The most reliable way to estimate cost is to discuss the project scope before fieldwork is scheduled.
Have a project that needs reliable surveying, LiDAR, or reality capture deliverables? Contact Aerial Metrology & Inspection to discuss your scope, timeline, and project requirements.
