Hacker News Reader

Comment by nickthegreek | Hacker News Reader

They all suck. I've tried so many from cellphones to $5k devices. Until you get into $20k systems, don't expect a workable scan that doesn't required many hours of CAD work for cleanup.

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.

View on HN

Tangentially related but I've had a 3D printer for years but only just recently learned Fusion 360; it has been a real game changer in terms of the kind of projects I can tackle. Can't recommend it enough.

Shapr3D was the game changer for me - although you need an iPad pro for that one

What did you use to learn F360? I’ve been meaning to get started for a minute. But when I have the time I tend to forget to fire up 360.

I used lynda.com myself. In many cities in the USA you can get free access to the site through your local library. I found it easier then searching for a video here and there on youtube.

I’ll look into it. I have pluralsight through work. But I’ll check the library for Lynda.com access.

Start with making rings. It sounds silly, but they’re small so they print fast so you’ll get to learn fast. Plus, people will enjoy them.

Containers is a great next step from rings. They’ll encourage learning about fit, coordinate systems, and support structures.

There's a two or three parter on youtube where some main Autodesk dude makes a widget. It's something like 90 minutes all-in, and that was enough to give me the traction I needed to start experimenting. From there it's re-watch bits as needed, and googling around---mostly ending up at the Fusion 360 help forums.

I think Solidworks is a better bet for numerous reasons:

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

I believe Fusion360 is free if you are making less than $100k/yr on it. And the skills are transferable to Solidworks if you continue with CAD.

It may be free, but it's still proprietary

You think? I could never figure out how to do anything in SolidWorks, whereas I could just pick up Fusion and create. Fusion's interface seemed much more intuitive to me, and I had zero experience with CAD before. Plus, it's free.

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).

SolidWorks is $5000/seat, right? At least, for the non-Student version?

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?

not a solution, but their entrepreneurial pack will set you up with a year long seat on just about whatever software they offer for free.

Student files are not incompatible, but as soon as a student licensed copy touches a part or assembly, it becomes "tainted" (such that it says "student edition" in the corner or something). I worked at a university-based company where we had a bunch of student licenses and a couple pro licenses, and we had to be very careful about separating the files and making sure that the student edition never touched our professional files.

I'd disagree with 2 and 3, at least at the hobbyist level. Fusion can import STEP files, which at least in my experience are far more common that SolidWorks files. And there's a huge number of Fusion tutorials and videos online, not to mention that Autodesk has a large selection of howto videos on their website.

Organic modeling in Solidworks seems to be extremely difficult. That being said, the Power Surfacing plugin has a good reputation:

https://www.npowersoftware.com/NewPowerSurfacingOverview.htm...

Skilled operators can likely work near-magic anyway, given sufficient time. ;)

Totally agree. The only "cheap" 3d scanners that work even somewhat well are the ones designed to scan small objects via a rotating table and laser/diode array. I've had decent results with a friend's Einscan SP ($2,500) and a ~3 inch model, but awful results with every handheld I've tried under 20k, even at CES this year.

Seconded for Fusion360. Lots of great guides online and an intuitive UI. I started using it when i got a CNC router and eventually transitioned to 3D printing. I did not have a modeling background and felt comfortable making things after about a month

I’ve used an Einscan-SE/SP. How do the 20k+ scanners reduce the part-to-cad workflow? Is the software that’s included do a 10x better job of cleaning up the scan?

Why don't depth cameras and SLAM techniques work?

Generally, the depth cameras don't provide enough precision in the data to be able to manage anything usable. If you want to scan an object to recreate something close it'll generally work ok but if you wanted to scan the object to build around it, and have things like up accurately then it's not good enough.

They do work, just not well enough to be useful for scanning. I have a handheld infrared SLAM scanner, and when it encounters moderately reflective or dark surfaces, it interprets them as voids because they absorb or scatter the IR. Anything translucent or refractive is similarly a nonstarter. The surfaces it does scan are not very accurate (covered in slight bumps from inaccuracies). This means it can't scan most objects, and the ones it can scan still require a ton of cleanup.

well it looks like its a multiview structured light and another type of camera.

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com