Photogrammetry vs. LiDAR on Job Sites — When Each Wins
Introduction
Not all drone mapping technologies are created equal. In construction, two methods dominate the conversation: photogrammetry and LiDAR. Both create 3D models of a site, both help project teams visualize progress and measure volumes, and both are widely used in the industry.
But here’s the catch: they’re not interchangeable. Choosing the wrong one can mean wasted budget, inaccurate data, or deliverables that don’t integrate with your CAD workflows.
So how do you know which tool is right for the job? In this post, we’ll compare photogrammetry vs. LiDAR in construction applications — breaking down how they work, when each excels, and when combining them delivers the best of both worlds.
What is Photogrammetry?
Photogrammetry is the science of using overlapping photographs to create 3D models of surfaces. Drones fly over a site, capturing hundreds or thousands of images from different angles, which are then processed into point clouds, orthomosaics, and surface models.
Strengths of Photogrammetry
High-resolution visuals: Captures detailed, realistic images of terrain, structures, and progress.
Cost-effective: Requires only a camera-equipped drone (like a DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise).
Great for marketing: Produces stunning visuals and 3D models clients love.
Good accuracy: With RTK/PPK correction and GCPs, achieves 2–3 cm accuracy.
Weaknesses of Photogrammetry
Struggles with dense vegetation (can’t “see through” trees).
Harder to capture fine vertical elements like steel rebar cages.
Shadows, snow, or reflective surfaces can degrade model quality.
What is LiDAR?
LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) uses laser pulses to directly measure distances from the drone to surfaces. The result is a dense point cloud that can penetrate vegetation and capture minute surface details invisible to cameras.
Strengths of LiDAR
Vegetation penetration: Can map terrain even under tree canopy.
High-density point clouds: Millions of data points per scan.
Captures vertical structures: Ideal for telecom towers, bridges, and steel.
Consistency in poor lighting: Works in shadows, low sun, or even at night.
Weaknesses of LiDAR
Higher cost: LiDAR sensors and processing are more expensive.
Heavier payloads: Requires larger drones, more complex workflows.
Less visual realism: Outputs are data-heavy but lack photorealistic detail.
Cost Comparison
When deciding between photogrammetry and LiDAR, cost is a major factor:
Photogrammetry
Low entry cost (standard drone + RTK module).
Lower processing costs.
Great ROI for most earthwork and documentation needs.
LiDAR
High entry cost (sensors can cost tens of thousands).
Requires more processing power and software.
ROI justified for complex projects (dense vegetation, telecom, structural steel).
Bottom line: Photogrammetry is ideal for most everyday construction sites. LiDAR is the right choice when terrain complexity or vertical detail accuracy is critical.
When to Use Photogrammetry
Photogrammetry is the workhorse for many construction applications:
Earthwork Tracking
Accurate cut/fill calculations.
Stockpile volume reconciliation.
Progress Documentation
Weekly or monthly orthomosaics.
3D models for owner updates.
Marketing Visuals
Beautiful renders for stakeholders.
Drone fly-throughs and 3D tours.
In short: If your primary goal is documentation, visualization, and general accuracy, photogrammetry is your best option.
When to Use LiDAR
LiDAR shines when accuracy and density must go beyond what photogrammetry can deliver.
Telecom Towers & Antenna Alignment
Capture exact azimuth, tilt, and roll.
Essential for carrier standards compliance.
Forested Utility Corridors
Map right-of-way even through heavy canopy.
Identify slopes, vegetation encroachment, and access paths.
Complex Vertical As-Builts
Bridges, industrial plants, and steel structures.
Creates dense, engineering-grade point clouds.
LiDAR is often overkill for simple earthwork, but irreplaceable for detailed structural or vegetation-heavy environments.
Hybrid Workflows
The truth is, photogrammetry and LiDAR aren’t rivals — they’re complementary.
Visual Context + Data Precision
Photogrammetry provides photorealistic images.
LiDAR provides dense, highly accurate point clouds.
Together, they create models that look real and measure precisely.
BIM and CAD Integration
LiDAR point clouds align with CAD.
Photogrammetry overlays provide visual context for engineers.
Case Example
A utility contractor maps a forested corridor: LiDAR penetrates canopy, photogrammetry provides visuals for client presentations.
Best Practices for Choosing Between the Two
Define the Deliverables First
Do you need photorealistic images for owners? Or point clouds for engineers?
Match Accuracy to Use Case
Sub-inch accuracy needed? LiDAR.
Visual progress tracking? Photogrammetry.
Factor Budget and Timeline
Photogrammetry = faster, cheaper.
LiDAR = higher upfront investment, longer processing.
Consider Hybrid Capture
When in doubt, combine both methods.
Why This Matters for Construction Teams
Choosing the right drone mapping workflow isn’t just about technology — it’s about protecting budgets, preventing disputes, and delivering value to owners.
Owners want visuals they understand.
Engineers demand accuracy they can trust.
Contractors need documentation to protect against liability.
Knowing when to use photogrammetry, LiDAR, or both keeps your project on track and your data defensible.
