I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a good level of detail.
I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be more appropriate for the hackspace. If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a pledge for it.
If you're after a high level of detail and accuracy, I think a contact-probe is still the best unless you're spending thousands on precision laser scanners.
Then again, one of the Leap Motion devices and a stepper-driven turntable would probably be excellent, but the device isn't out yet. (expected feb 2013)
> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to
> be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it
> achieves a good level of detail.
> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would
> be more appropriate for the hackspace.
> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting
> a pledge for it.
> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a good level of detail.
> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be more appropriate for the hackspace.
> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a pledge for it.
> Don't people simply use the Kinekt these days? Afaik we have one or two at
> the space.
> m.
> On 8 Oct 2012, at 19:24, Ulisses wrote:
> > I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be
> able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it
> achieves a good level of detail.
> > I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would
> be more appropriate for the hackspace.
> > If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting
> a pledge for it.
It depends upon what you want to scan: sizes of objects, and expected detail.
The Kinect is fundamentally unsuitable for use as a scanner: it is a very, very noisy sensor, and it has a very low resolution. (time-of-flight is not good for precision work)
I'm guessing that the most likely use is something in the 1cm to 200cm a side range, for use in a 3D printer.
The best option with our budget at this point is to make a scanner. Laser line scanners or structured light are a good way to go, as they are inexpensive, and can be adjusted to scan objects of different sizes, after calibration.
There are a good number of builds out there, and it's a fairly well-documented thing.
In general, you need a good camera, turntable w/ stepper, and either a laser line or a decent small projector that can be controlled precisely.
Contact probes are very accurate, but they're problematic to use, not to mention expensive.
On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the > hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to > be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it > achieves a good level of detail.
> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be > more appropriate for the hackspace. > If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a > pledge for it.
> It depends upon what you want to scan: sizes of objects, and expected
> detail.
> The Kinect is fundamentally unsuitable for use as a scanner: it is a very,
> very noisy sensor, and it has a very low resolution. (time-of-flight is not
> good for precision work)
> I'm guessing that the most likely use is something in the 1cm to 200cm a
> side range, for use in a 3D printer.
> The best option with our budget at this point is to make a scanner. Laser
> line scanners or structured light are a good way to go, as they are
> inexpensive, and can be adjusted to scan objects of different sizes, after
> calibration.
> There are a good number of builds out there, and it's a fairly
> well-documented thing.
> In general, you need a good camera, turntable w/ stepper, and either a
> laser line or a decent small projector that can be controlled precisely.
> Contact probes are very accurate, but they're problematic to use, not to
> mention expensive.
> This is the Hack Space! Let's build one!
> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
> > I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
> > hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to
> > be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it
> > achieves a good level of detail.
> > I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
> > more appropriate for the hackspace.
> > If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a
> > pledge for it.
On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the > hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to > be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it > achieves a good level of detail.
> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be > more appropriate for the hackspace. > If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a > pledge for it.
Ok so, the Kinect isn't time of flight for starters, its based around
structured light. It is noisy but the resolution is not as bad as
you'd think. Again, some great work from Microsoft research on the
macro level stuff (desk and room) but not for small objects.
Laser line scanners of the home brew variety and the one hipster built
are flawed. The software is utter crap (I know because I've had the
debug it).
Structured light scanners are worse than the kinect and a bitch to setup.
Dual camera rigs and time of flight... yeah, they dont work so well either.
Touch probes, not so sure about. One thing that does work however is
my scanner! :D
however, again, the resolution is questionable but with a better
laser, you essentially have a touch point sensor. A higher resolution
and only 4 cameras or maybe even 3 would work a treat. This is easy to
build and the maths is not so bad.
Ultimately though, the nicest solution would be the monocular SLAM approach!
> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
>> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
>> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able
>> to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a
>> good level of detail.
>> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
>> more appropriate for the hackspace.
>> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a
>> pledge for it.
> Ok so, the Kinect isn't time of flight for starters, its based around
> structured light. It is noisy but the resolution is not as bad as
> you'd think. Again, some great work from Microsoft research on the
> macro level stuff (desk and room) but not for small objects.
> Laser line scanners of the home brew variety and the one hipster built
> are flawed. The software is utter crap (I know because I've had the
> debug it).
> Structured light scanners are worse than the kinect and a bitch to setup.
> Dual camera rigs and time of flight... yeah, they dont work so well either.
> Touch probes, not so sure about. One thing that does work however is
> my scanner! :D
> however, again, the resolution is questionable but with a better
> laser, you essentially have a touch point sensor. A higher resolution
> and only 4 cameras or maybe even 3 would work a treat. This is easy to
> build and the maths is not so bad.
> Ultimately though, the nicest solution would be the monocular SLAM approach!
>> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
>>> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
>>> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able
>>> to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a
>>> good level of detail.
>>> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
>>> more appropriate for the hackspace.
>>> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a
>>> pledge for it.
Actually, this post gave me an idea. There is another option; a CAT scanner.
I already have that x-ray machine head and would need help building it up anyway. I'd be surprised if the resultant data couldn't be turned into useful model files. And it'd show internal voids/structure.
Would require an x-ray lumenescent panel, mirror, decent resolution low-light camera with PC control and a stepper-driven turntable. And of course a lead-sheilded enclosure with safety interlock and a PC to do the image conversion.
> Ok so, the Kinect isn't time of flight for starters, its based around
> structured light. It is noisy but the resolution is not as bad as
> you'd think. Again, some great work from Microsoft research on the
> macro level stuff (desk and room) but not for small objects.
> Laser line scanners of the home brew variety and the one hipster built
> are flawed. The software is utter crap (I know because I've had the
> debug it).
> Structured light scanners are worse than the kinect and a bitch to setup.
> Dual camera rigs and time of flight... yeah, they dont work so well either.
> Touch probes, not so sure about. One thing that does work however is
> my scanner! :D
> however, again, the resolution is questionable but with a better
> laser, you essentially have a touch point sensor. A higher resolution
> and only 4 cameras or maybe even 3 would work a treat. This is easy to
> build and the maths is not so bad.
> Ultimately though, the nicest solution would be the monocular SLAM approach!
>> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
>>> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
>>> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able
>>> to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a
>>> good level of detail.
>>> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
>>> more appropriate for the hackspace.
>>> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting a
>>> pledge for it.
On 9 October 2012 14:27, Peter "Sci" Turpin <s...@sci-fi-fox.com> wrote:
> Would require an x-ray lumenescent panel, mirror, decent resolution
> low-light camera with PC control and a stepper-driven turntable. And of
> course a lead-sheilded enclosure with safety interlock and a PC to do the
> image conversion.
It's worth talking to Mike Harrison because he just got a line-scan
baggage X-Ray machine which he's intending to strip for parts. The
sensors in it seem useful and pretty easy to interface. As always, he
has a great teardown video:
> On 9 October 2012 14:27, Peter "Sci" Turpin <s...@sci-fi-fox.com> wrote:
>> Would require an x-ray lumenescent panel, mirror, decent resolution
>> low-light camera with PC control and a stepper-driven turntable. And of
>> course a lead-sheilded enclosure with safety interlock and a PC to do the
>> image conversion.
> It's worth talking to Mike Harrison because he just got a line-scan
> baggage X-Ray machine which he's intending to strip for parts. The
> sensors in it seem useful and pretty easy to interface. As always, he
> has a great teardown video:
Building a new 3D scanner seems in fact more in line with the Hackspace
philosophy ;)
There are however some points I'm worried about:
- Are there several people that built the scanner that reported it works
properly and has a good level of precision?
- The documentation to build the scanner is detailed enough, so that we
don't get stuck in the middle of the build, not knowing how to proceed, or
building it incorrectly.
- Is there is software developed to work with the scanner? Just having the
machine without software is really not that usefull...
In case someone knows a project that answers all these points, can you send
a link to it?
On 9 October 2012 01:28, Olfin <anton...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It depends upon what you want to scan: sizes of objects, and expected
> detail.
> The Kinect is fundamentally unsuitable for use as a scanner: it is a very,
> very noisy sensor, and it has a very low resolution. (time-of-flight is not
> good for precision work)
> I'm guessing that the most likely use is something in the 1cm to 200cm a
> side range, for use in a 3D printer.
> The best option with our budget at this point is to make a scanner. Laser
> line scanners or structured light are a good way to go, as they are
> inexpensive, and can be adjusted to scan objects of different sizes, after
> calibration.
> There are a good number of builds out there, and it's a fairly
> well-documented thing.
> In general, you need a good camera, turntable w/ stepper, and either a
> laser line or a decent small projector that can be controlled precisely.
> Contact probes are very accurate, but they're problematic to use, not to
> mention expensive.
> This is the Hack Space! Let's build one!
> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
>> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
>> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to
>> be able to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it
>> achieves a good level of detail.
>> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
>> more appropriate for the hackspace.
>> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting
>> a pledge for it.
tbh, the project I was on was a lot of fun and I'd like to see more
work on the reconstruction from movement with a single camera. I think
that would be a useful application. In medical surgery, such cameras
are used a lot and reconstruction on 3D is quite useful. Hence the
motivation, and money, for the work we did. I think scanners are one
of these things that really need an application to be worth the time.
X-Rays are, I suppose, fun but reducing the amount we use is probably
a good thing.
Ultrasound, on the otherhand.... ;)
On 10 October 2012 10:13, Ben Blundell <o...@section9.co.uk> wrote:
> tbh, the project I was on was a lot of fun and I'd like to see more
> work on the reconstruction from movement with a single camera. I think
> that would be a useful application. In medical surgery, such cameras
> are used a lot and reconstruction on 3D is quite useful. Hence the
> motivation, and money, for the work we did. I think scanners are one
> of these things that really need an application to be worth the time.
> X-Rays are, I suppose, fun but reducing the amount we use is probably
> a good thing.
> On 9 October 2012 19:08, Ulisses Pinto <pinto.ulis...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Building a new 3D scanner seems in fact more in line with the Hackspace
>> philosophy ;)
>> There are however some points I'm worried about:
>> - Are there several people that built the scanner that reported it works
>> properly and has a good level of precision?
>> - The documentation to build the scanner is detailed enough, so that we
>> don't get stuck in the middle of the build, not knowing how to proceed, or
>> building it incorrectly.
>> - Is there is software developed to work with the scanner? Just having the
>> machine without software is really not that usefull...
>> In case someone knows a project that answers all these points, can you send
>> a link to it?
>> On 9 October 2012 01:28, Olfin <anton...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It depends upon what you want to scan: sizes of objects, and expected
>>> detail.
>>> The Kinect is fundamentally unsuitable for use as a scanner: it is a very,
>>> very noisy sensor, and it has a very low resolution. (time-of-flight is not
>>> good for precision work)
>>> I'm guessing that the most likely use is something in the 1cm to 200cm a
>>> side range, for use in a 3D printer.
>>> The best option with our budget at this point is to make a scanner. Laser
>>> line scanners or structured light are a good way to go, as they are
>>> inexpensive, and can be adjusted to scan objects of different sizes, after
>>> calibration.
>>> There are a good number of builds out there, and it's a fairly
>>> well-documented thing.
>>> In general, you need a good camera, turntable w/ stepper, and either a
>>> laser line or a decent small projector that can be controlled precisely.
>>> Contact probes are very accurate, but they're problematic to use, not to
>>> mention expensive.
>>> This is the Hack Space! Let's build one!
>>> On Monday, 8 October 2012 19:24:00 UTC+1, Ulisses wrote:
>>>> I've been thinking that a resource that could be very usefull for the
>>>> hackspace would be a 3D Scanner. I suppose it didn't really need to be able
>>>> to scan very big objects; it's probably more important that it achieves a
>>>> good level of detail.
>>>> I'd like to have your feedback about which 3D Scanners you think would be
>>>> more appropriate for the hackspace.
>>>> If there are many people that find it usefull it would be worth starting
>>>> a pledge for it.
