Tech check: 3D models from iNat pictures

[portioid]

Anybody here who can quickly assess the possibility of creating complete (and at least moderate resolution) 3D models from rigid specimens? For example, sitting cicadas, seeds, …

I have zero. expertise in this, but from what I've seen, the technology for this essentially seems to be there. But I have no idea how hard it would be to implement.

Apart from technical complexity, I'm not sure how few pictures of what quality would be sufficient for getting an acceptable (at least crude) model. Would it be possible/feasible to use multiple observations to compile a hybrid model?

Looking at low-poly art a bit, I think even quite simple models could be not only beautiful, but also helpful:

* with annotations, can be used to 

  * teach about morphology, and 

  * quickly look up things like "the apical spine arising from the hindleg's 2nd tarsal segment" (that defines the Nogodinidae) ;)

* to create pretty overview tables, focusing on body shapes or specific anatomical features

* and also give an additional "wow" factor to iNaturalst.

it's also scalable in the way that even just ten, or a hundred models would already be useful.

So, all I'd like to know would be: is this feasible today, or better to wait a few years? or just kidnap a 3D artist in a room, with the only mission to create a 3D library? :)

[portioid]

Or of course get a museum specimen scanning project going: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Buckelzirpe.webm

My main point is that currently, the taxonomic key situation is not easily approachable by interested laypeople. Any system that makes that more accessible would surely be valuable in recruiting new naturalists. For example, by creating clear anatomical diagrams for as many defining characteristics as possible.

[James Bailey]

3D model software takes some time to learn and I've always wanted to do it myself, but I could just never get the hang of it.