Desktop 3D Scanner (Kickstarter)

[Nagalfar]

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/621838643/desktop-3d-scanner for about 650 pound.

It isn't a nextEngine but who can afford these anyway. What do you think? Improvement over Kinect or just another ripoff? They promised to add some extra models this week, eager to see them. A 0.2mm resolution sounds good in generall, but the attached dragon reminds me to what I've seen in ReconstructMe.

[Elbot]

The resolution doesn't matter. I have a nextengine and the resolution doesn't matter because your 3d printer cannot print the microscopic resolution the nextengine is capable of anyways. However, the value of the nextengine is the software. Before you back that kickstarter, ask them if the software will yield a crappy "point cloud" or a WATERTIGHT *.stl or *.obj file that is 3d printable. Most of the time, the file can go straight to repg to print from the nextengine. Sometimes, I need to clean it up a bit with Netfabb and/or drill a hole in it with netfabb. This takes 5 min or less. Nextengine has problems with holes that are deep and narrow because the scanning lasers cannot penetrate these holes.

If you have to manually clean up a point cloud that is not watertight to turn it into a triangle mesh that is watertight and  3d printable, it may take HOURS to do. That would be worthless and a ripoff. ASK THEM.

[Sean Tu]

Resolution does matter if you try to scan in a gearbox cover for a 1/8th scale RC car with a camera like a Kinect/Xtion which was designed to capture the overall shape of a human head. If the resolution is too low for what you need it just doesn't work.

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Elbot <tomas...@gmail.com> wrote:

The resolution doesn't matter. I have a nextengine and the resolution doesn't matter because your 3d printer cannot print the microscopic resolution the nextengine is capable of anyways. However, the value of the nextengine is the software. Before you back that kickstarter, ask them if the software will yield a crappy "point cloud" or a WATERTIGHT *.stl or *.obj file that is 3d printable. Most of the time, the file can go straight to repg to print from the nextengine. Sometimes, I need to clean it up a bit with Netfabb and/or drill a hole in it with netfabb. This takes 5 min or less. Nextengine has problems with holes that are deep and narrow because the scanning lasers cannot penetrate these holes.

If you have to manually clean up a point cloud that is not watertight to turn it into a triangle mesh that is watertight and  3d printable, it may take HOURS to do. That would be worthless and a ripoff. ASK THEM.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Uses structured light, so considerably higher resolution than a Kinect.

[Joe Larson (aka Cymon)]

Dang it, hit send too soon.

Structured light, so higher res than a Kinect, but not as fast as a kinect. You couldn't scan a child with this thing.

[Adrian Fan]

In the FAQ on the Kickstarter page, the company says that their scanner can produce a watertight, 3d mesh of objects that it scans.

This mesh can be saved in a number of formats and is suitable for 3d printing without any further processing. 

An example mesh can be found here: https://sketchfab.com/show/7PD9jGD65aU5puFzGSC9ankXJ66

For users who wish to perform their own meshing or manipulation of the model, the data can also be saved as a point cloud. 

An example of the corresponding point cloud can be found here: https://sketchfab.com/show/yU8pxG54sxpaqu9Dk7pazJOg358

[Elbot]

Yah, you could scan a kiddo. Just give the lil tike a shot o' propofol ;0)

(kiddin!)

[Nagalfar]

I'd say resolution always matters in a way similar as in many other products as well. Desktop 3D Printing currently envelops really fast. If I compare the Rep2 with my 2 years and 10 months old cupcake there's worlds in between. And even if you are currently unable to print a high enough resolution (although I'm absolutely sure I can already print at a better resolution than a kinect scan delivers, thats uncomparable to the results of your nextEngine scanner - nice thing btw. ;) ) the day Desktop printer exceeding a cheap scan surely is ahead. So it's logical to look for the best resolution you can afford.

[Elbot]

I think you misunderstand. The 0.1 mm you mentioned is the layer height, but if you'll remember, layer height is only the z axis. Ya gotta think in 3 dimensions. What I am talking about is the x and y axes. Remember, the nozzle is 0.4 mm wide so that's the theoretical limit on feature size on the x and y axes. Practically, you can print most features down to 0.9 mm for x and y axes. If you're printing with raft and the item is small, even down to 0.05 mm layer height is possible.

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:47:35 AM UTC-6, Bryon Miller wrote:

The printer really can't print fine detail at .1mm? 

[Elbot]

oh, and make sure you have a quad core computer or you can't take advantage of the HD functions of the nextengine and as byron mentioned, it will take forever to slice and process if you have a dual core computer. the better the computer the better and faster your processing is going to be. even with quad core, if i forget to simplify the triangle mesh in netfabb, it takes over an hour for repg to prep the file for print.

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:40:07 AM UTC-6, Bryon Miller wrote:

I have a nextengine 3d scanner.  The link you provided is producing much better quality than the kinect.  It looks very similar to what my scanner does on small objects that would be aprox 8" from the face of the scanner.  It appears to do a good job, looks to work the same way with point clouds etc.  The nextengine could do larger scans because it's not an enclosure and can be mounted to a tripod.  But for the price difference, I think it would be a good choice if the objects you want to scan will fit inside the enclosure they are using.  Nextengine is able to get a lot of detail because in macro mode it can capture up to 40,000 pts per sec I think.  If you ask the company how many points per sec that scanner brings in, you'll get an idea of how much detail it can pick up.  10k to 17k will still get very good detail.  THEN you get Topogun for only $100 and use the scanned mesh as a refrence mesh and use the tools to shrinkwrap a skin around the ref mesh to produce a low poly version while retaining as much detail as possible so it doesn't take an eon to process through the slicing program when preparing to print in 3d.

If you want to use a nextengine scanner, see if there's a university or college in the area that has one.  When I got mine, I went to google looking for help because there's a learning curve.  I got alot of information from colleges that have this item and have detailed instructions for students on how to use it.  A lot of them use the scanner to scan artifacts into a digital database.

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 3:19:41 AM UTC-7, Nagalfar wrote:

[Joseph Chiu]

It's like trying to sign your papers with a MarksALot marker! :)

--

[Wingcommander whpthomas]

Practically, you can print most features down to 0.9 mm for x and y axes.

This is not quite right, its more like having a mill with an x/y resolution of 0.01mm and a tool head 0.4mm wide. You can print fine details, but the corners are limited by the tool radius, i.e. the extruded plastic width. You just have to factor this into your expectations of what is possible and think of it as a constraint in the way you design things. So as long as the edge is longer than the radius of the tool, you will see the fine detail - if its not you may get something - or nothing depending on the feature.