Using a Microsoft Kinect to scan image for printing?

[nallath 1,120]

Your best bet at the moment is the david SLS scanner (unless you want to spend 15k on a scanner).

 

[ultiarjan 1,223]

ordered myself a fuel 3d (http://fuel-3d.com/), but delivery can still take a while.... I'll share my experience when I have it.

It's good on small objects, but very much depending on the object surface, shiny materials will probably be very hard.

 

[visu-al 2]

i think if someone does a good job programming a software the kinect v2 sensor it should be possible to get good results down to a resolution of <1 cm but you still would need accuracy more like <1mm

 

[printerfan 5]

What do you guys think about the Fuel 3d, any potential? Definitely keep us posted on the results you get UltiArjan.

Anyone have any scan examples for the David sls? The ones I've seen do not look much better than a kinect.

 

[nallath 1,120]

http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0180/7671/products/collected_scans_view_71ef0987-2f30-427b-9456-6209f9fe321d_grande.jpg?v=1400495790%20

For reference sake; Kinect has a accuracy of +-7 (!) mm. Structured light sensors tend to have about +- 0.1-0.2 mm accuracy.

The fuel 3D has potential; It uses a combination of 'Photometric stereo' (Lighting a object from different directions, see how intensity changes and use that to calculate the orientation of the surface (also known as the normal)) combined with 'standard' stereo feature matching.

 

[peggyb 169]

here are some examples from the David and they are definitely better than the Kinect

 

[visu-al 2]

the accuracy turns relativ if you do an accumulation of pointclouds were you can rescan over and over until you got the resolution you need, but i dont' really know what the hardware/software limitations are for this task.. i still hope that just someone writes the perfect software..

A david scanner costs like 500$? and you'll need a projector thats another 500$ while the kinect V2 sensor is 150$ and u will be able to use it as kinect as well..

 

[nallath 1,120]

This is only theoretically the case. For all practical intents and purposes you will not be able to do this (usually due to processing / memory /time issues).

 

The david linescanner is 2200 euro all inclusive.

 

[visu-al 2]

ok well so no (low cost) hope until we got quantum computers? haha

maybe in combination with an acceleration sensor or positioning system or just super cool tricked code that doesn't need all builded memory to accumulate the precision?

close to were i live is a company that creates those hq laser scanners for crimescene scan that stuff i very expensive i can imagine

can't we create a laser scanner system like that diy low cost ? or an ultrasonic 3d scan device? (just kidding)

 

[LePaul 321]

This is a great discussion!

I'm learning alot...keep it rolling

 

[LePaul 321]

I was curious if anyone used a MakerBot Digitizer?

As that's been out a while, I have been searching to see what others have made that are cheaper and better (plus I am no fan of Bre/Makerbot)

 

[LePaul 321]

Check out http://www.nextengine.com/

 

[visu-al 2]

i just can't loose the feeling that this will go furter with this methode

 

it should be allready, the video is neraly 2 years old tough

 

[LePaul 321]

i just can't loose the feeling that this will go furter with this methode

 

 

Yeah I saw this a week ago...which initially gave me hope!

 

[printerfan 5]

Jerry, "Barnacles", reviewed the Nextengine scanner and didn't seem overly impressed:

 

 

[ultiarjan 1,223]

Ha ha. The head scan is impossible. At least thats just 1 to 3 "fotos" with the fuel 3d.

[DidierKlein 729]

I have not seen the digitzer in action, just check on thingiverse the scans that are posted it will give you an idea... from what i've seen it's not worth the price

 

[nallath 1,120]

The digitizer sucks. I've not seen any scan that I would consider okay. You get about the same results from a kinect, but way slower.

The next engine is kinda slow, mostly because of the line lasers, which simply take tons of time.

 

[LePaul 321]

Hmm, so that's out....we're weeding through them!

 

[printerfan 5]

123D Catch from Autodesk is worth trying. Its free and utilizes captured images that you take with a digital camera or phone and upload it to the cloud, where it is processed and sent back as a 3d mesh. You probably need 40-50 pictures all around the object to get a good image. I tried it with about 20 pictures and it didn't turn out great, but I saw potential for it to be better had I taken more pictures.

 

[LePaul 321]

I can't get 123D to work for me I sign in with the account I created and it just sits there. And Autodesk doesn't have anything listed for support on this, so I'm struggling to find a way to fix the account

And after spending an hour on it....I'm done with it

 

[ultiarjan 1,223]

Same here. Tried it. Never got it to work. Gave up after an hour or so.

[LePaul 321]

Okay it wasn't just me

So what next!

 

[printerfan 5]

What device did you download it on? I have it on my phone and it worked relatively smoothly, I think my issues was operator error in not taking enough pictures.

 

[AI80 0]

I know this thread has not been active for a long time, but anyway. Have anyone here a kinect 2 windows, and dona aa scan with it?

How good resolution was it? in microns?