Go Scan 3D – Handheld 3D Scanner
creaform3d.com
creaform3d.com
I think this concept could eventually be a success just because it has the potential to be a lot cheaper than a fully automated/mechanized solution.
Just like the Scanman was a lot cheaper compared to the very expensive flatbed scanners of the 80s. Smaller, lighter, zero/minimal amounts of moving parts, etc. Perhaps not good enough for professional use, but the pro market was kinda small anyway.
I guess the endgame is that high-end 3d scanning functionality gets built into regular smartphones.
We will likely see 3D sensors get embedded into smartphones very soon but there are substantial trade offs in terms of size, power consumption, cost and performance. Also the consumer use-cases for 3D scanning are quite unclear. Hence what's going to be in phones will likely be used for enhancing AR applications / "Lenses" (proven use case) as opposed to capturing an accurate 3D representation of the world.
Like:
a) Scan a friend's face/head and then use an app to replace the hairstyle with something different.
b) Get a friend to scan your body (or scan your own feet) using your smartphone, then use that data to order custom outfits or shoes that fit perfectly.
I suppose if you were just looking to see which of a set of sizes would work best for a person, it might be easier. Also, today's technology is better and I didn't really know what I was doing. :)
But still... fabric measuring tapes are cheap and easy to use, and they won't invade your privacy or try to sell you stuff like phone app developers inevitably will.
> But still... fabric measuring tapes are cheap and easy to use
I disagree.
People tend to come in very unique shapes. Even a something "as simple" as a foot probably needs at least like 3-5 different measurements to something that really fits perfectly.
I worked for a sister division of Ametek (Creaform's parent corp) a while ago. It's a real company and this is a real product line (I think this is the 3rd or 4th gen product by now).
Ametek is big on precision metrology for industrial/aerospace use and Creaform is a bet on the future. The corporation also owns Taylor Hobson from the UK. They're not looking to put this into smartphones.
> They're not looking to put this into smartphones.
That probably means that someone else will be making money off this kind of feature.
Anway, I do hope this thing can go mainstream!
“Mainstream” doesn’t always equate to “success”. In fact, trying to please everyone usually pleases no one.
Creaform is doing just fine. They wouldn’t have been acquired otherwise.
See for example Oracle as an example closer to programming.
It's already a success, it's just priced beyond the reach of consumers by a couple of orders of magnitude. Creaform are the market leaders in a very competitive field.
https://www.aniwaa.com/best-handheld-and-portable-3d-scanner...
It'd be great to see quality level similar to the Obama 3D scan available to consumers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpMOe7O88cY
I've been hobbying around with Bellus3D's face app leveraging the iPhone's depth camera: https://www.bellus3d.com/faceapp/iphone
I'd bet if you scaled it appropriately you could just buy some doll shorts from a thrift store or eBay
I assume it’ll only be a matter of time before this tech makes it into everyone’s smartphones. Sensors and algorithms are cheap.
They use photogrammatry and do a fine job.
Photogrammetry will be your best bet. Also not cheap. https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/photogrammetry-software
I would really suggest learning Fusion 360 for mechanical or blender for organic modeling and build from scratch. It's a great toolset to know and can be very rewarding. It will teach your core skills that you can apply all the time with your 3d printer. If you have never done any 3d work before, start with tinkercad.com until you feel comfortable.
Containers is a great next step from rings. They’ll encourage learning about fit, coordinate systems, and support structures.
1) The interface seems to be simpler, especially when making things a little bit more complex
2) Greater amount of CAD models already available in this format
3) Greater amount of resources and tutorials
Nowadays I use OnShape because it's decent and the only thing that works on Linux. I do miss some of the more advanced features, though (e.g. simulation, or variables).
And the Student version is only available to people with a valid current student ID, and saves files in a format that is intentionally incompatible with the normal version?
https://www.npowersoftware.com/NewPowerSurfacingOverview.htm...
Skilled operators can likely work near-magic anyway, given sufficient time. ;)
So I suspect it is a SLAM system (how else can it make up an accurate mesh like that) but with a calibrated and well integrated depth sensor on there as well.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ye-C-OOFsX8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D0EhSi-vvc for a quick intro.
There are alternative workflows and "low cost" commercial hardware and software products even for photogrammetry in the market. Nearly every technique I have tried or seen produces a much lower quality result than the above, costs a lot more, or has some other limitation (such as the size of the object you can scan) that radically limit its usefulness.
This is of course until you get to the high end scanners like the one linked here which use one or more high resolution LIDAR sensors in conjunction with cameras, lights, motion sensors, etc: alll selected and calibrated to give precision results. If you can stomach the price they are awesome.
But to some degree, commercial solutions regardless of cost will often promise their output will require "no editing or post processing" You should be aware that this is total baloney. You will absolutely have to devote a little time and effort into learning how to edit, clean, and simplify meshes regardless of what you intend to do with them.
All this being said, this advice only really applies to objects where 3d scanning has some merit. If you want to 3d print something like a replacement part for a broken appliance, often 3d scanning even with an expensive commercial scanner is not the best approach. Many times it's considerably faster to pull out a pair of calipers and simply model the object in some CAD software like Fusion360 or for real simple stuff, even TinkerCAD.
Here’s how I get _good_ results on complex objects. Use agisoft photoscan, a cheap SLR and a stepper motor controlled turntable. You need to put all this in a photo tent and light it as flatly as possible. Then, you need to do surface prep. Spray your object with magnaflux spotchek. This is a white powder in acetone which will go down on the surface and make it temporarily matte. It wipes off when done.
When you’re done, process the images, process the mesh, and pull it into Rhino to repair it. If you’re modeling for a functional replacement, pull out your calipers and take measurements and use your 3D scan essentially to pick off profiles that you can loft to remodel the final object.
This shit is really hard.
I don't know how phone cameras hold up, but I was able to achieve decent results with a DSLR and some daylight lighting.
As for scanning, I've used Trnio on iPhone for artistic scans. e.g. I scanned my dog and printed a tiny replica. My nephew thought it was a pile of melted yogurt, but I knew what it was. :-)
incredibly good, but incredibly expensive and incredibly fragile.