Götz Echtenacher said: “The sole reason for placing CPs is to help RC along with an alignment. You only need to do that if RC is wrong in placing its own tie points”
First sentence true - but the second?
Isn’t it more often ‘You only need to do that if RC can’t place certain tie point(s) at all’? meaning it doesn’t recognise that something that exists in one pic is the same something that exists in another pic. When our eyes/minds can tell that, but RCs algorithms can’t.
And I’m suggesting that the 1 pixel CP placement resolution which is the best that we can achieve, is certain to be very error-full compared to the way-sub-1px resolution with which RC locates its own Features on a 2D pic.
So it’s an error-introducing way, both of
filling in ‘sameness’ info that RC’s algorithms can’t, and
putting right 2D Feature locations (hence 3D Tie point placements) that RC’s got wrong.
It’s gd to know, as everyone keeps saying, that the real answer is to get better photo sets!