Folks,
Has anyone here tried either the 3d scanner package, or just the software from Camtronics?

I have been reading up on everything I can find about this, and as ScanZ seems to have come to a complete halt,(which is really too bad as It looked to be fairly promising) I am curious what the Camtronics software is like before I throw the money at it.

Pros?
Cons?
Any opinions?

TIA

Iain

Bonjour,

http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/rob/david.html

http://juergen-riegel.net/FreeCAD/Docu/index.php/David

Michel.be


Folks,
Has anyone here tried either the 3d scanner package, or just the software from Camtronics?

I have been reading up on everything I can find about this, and as ScanZ seems to have come to a complete halt,(which is really too bad as It looked to be fairly promising) I am curious what the Camtronics software is like before I throw the money at it.

Pros?
Cons?
Any opinions?

TIA

Iain

I have looked at it and I personally prefer a higher resolution system.

There is also some freebie laser scanner software available you might be interested in.

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28420

See page 5 post #63 for details.

Have you looked into the NextEngine desktop scanner. It's cheap at $2500 and seems to end up with a fairly decent scan image.
https://www.nextengine.com/indexSecure.htm
The Neuron

Bonjour,

http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/rob/david.html

http://juergen-riegel.net/FreeCAD/Docu/index.php/David

Michel.be

CJL5585:
Thanks for the info, at this point I am a complete noob with laser scanning and basically know enough to know I need to ask questions before spending any coin on unfamiliar software. I have downloaded the David program to try,(as well as Meshlabs) and will see what happens next.

MonoNeuron:
$2500 is cheap??? Must all be in the context :)

Seriously, it looks like a decent little rig, but $2.5K is a little much for me to be spending on a curiosity driven experiment.
(TRANSLATION: My wife would have a friggin meltdown!!!!!:eek: )

Thanks for the suggestions though folks. If my little setup shows promise, I'll be looking at more complex (and expensive!) setups in the New Year.

ATB for the Holidays,

Iain

what were you thinking of scanning. I'm very experienced in 3D scanning and own a couple different systems myself. I have the handheld FastScan Cobra scanner and a mounted ScanTech scanner that has much higher resolution, but takes much longer to scan an object. The ScanTech put me back $30,000 U.S. and the FastScan was $24,000 U.S. Expensive toys, but well worth the price for my line of work.

You can check out some of my projects on www.revolutionaryminds.com. If there is anything someone is considering to scan, I receive parts from all over north america to scan and create 3D models or reverse molds from the scan.

The next engine scanner is o.k., but very limited in what you can scan. The object can't be very large and the scan will need a fare bit of touch up if you plan on using it to machine the object.

Bonjour,

http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/rob/david.html

http://juergen-riegel.net/FreeCAD/Docu/index.php/David

Michel.be

Michel,
My apologies, when I replied to the others, your post was not there. I have downloaded the David software to try, and now am looking for a laser unit with a very fine line.

Shrthang,
I'm currently using a touch probe to digitize models for scaling and cutting plugs. Like alot of people here, I am trying to complicate my hobby of RC models...:p
Like any normal person, I could get a plan, cut out the parts, assemble the pieces, stick the electronics in and go flying or boating.
But no.. I think, "hey, I'm only doing a one off, lets make a CNC, digitize a plastic model, melt my brain cleaning up the results, output to the CNC and wind up spending 10-20 times as long making the model as anyone else.....!"
Personally, I think it's more fun my way:) .

Unfortunately, the problem with the touch probe is how slow it is. If I can cut 90% (or more) of the machine time, with the same amount of cleanup required (currently lots!) I'll be a very happy camper.

Anything more is a bonus.

ATB
Iain

I have created and replicated existing RC model planes. They were larger models and obviously rare and hard to find, which is why the owners were willing to pay to have the files created properly. Now if they want more pieces cut, it's only the material and machine time they need to cover.

I've often considered making my own RC model, but just have not got around to it.

Kurt

Taking pictures and importing them into Cad and then tracing the outline is another quick and simple way to draw a simple model of an object.

So it seems that you can scan with David(free) view and simple cleanup with meshlab(free) and export to mesh cam (not free)

Meshlab will read the obj and out put mechcam readable stl's

Now just need to learn blender for peacing together multiple scans and real cleanup

Sony Handycam dv through split cam working so far .

Hey its free
how cool is that
Dave

Hi!

Just yesterday i downloaded the DAVID software and made the first test and i'm very impressed. For the first test i used a Logitech Quizkcam Zoom and a 30€ laser level from a commercial center. You can see the results on the attached images.

Next week i want do more test with a Panasonic videocam, but i'm thinking two more alternatives:

1.- Refrigerate the Quickcam CMOS with a Peltier module and a fan unit to decrease the thermal noise.

2.- Put the laser on a vertical rail moved with a steper motor, take photo with my digital camera on each step, make a video with the photos and send it to the DAVID software through a virtual webcam software like Fake Webcam.

I will publish my results here...

Persew,
Is that the image straight from David, or has it been processed?
If that is raw, compared to what I get from a mechanical probe, I am very impressed.

I am sure there are better systems/software available, but for freeware software it is impressive.

Methinks we owe the development team a BIG round of thanks..

Iain

Who's still looking for a laser that can give a line thickness of less than 1/8" at 4 foot range....

I'm also trying the David software using the laser line generator out of my bench drill, and either a low end webcam - SmartCam, or my canon powershot g2, which has a short video mode.
Not getting on too well at the moment, but I will persevere.
I'm going to need help understanding why my cheap webcam works(up to a point) but my high-end camera isn't found by the software, even though I can get a "live" image on the monitor within canon's own software.
John

Hi Iain.
just read your latest post, so I've checked my drill laser - 0.25" at 4' I'm afraid.

Hi Jerry, I'm going to be split between my own thread and this one, I can see.
But my new thought is could one use a bright light(quartz) illuminating a slit with a decent lens as an alternative to a laser ?

Split cam will make the canon work ( should?)
After playing a day,first a low rez web cam then my sony DV (with split cam)
Each time better results, I went and picked up a Microsoft" life cam vx 6000"
1 meg / video 5 meg still

Wondering about a larger alignment wall ?

Hi Iain.
just read your latest post, so I've checked my drill laser - 0.25" at 4' I'm afraid.

--snip--
But my new thought is could one use a bright light(quartz) illuminating a slit with a decent lens as an alternative to a laser ?

At this point, I don't have a laser on hand to try, but I think that may be solved tomorrow, so what would happen if the laser lens was masked? Would it damage anything?
Could a thick mask (heavy tape?) be used to "thin" the line the laser projects?

One problem I can see with masking a quartz lamp, or even a krypton automotive bulb, is the heat generated by the bulb. Quartz gets nasty hot, quickly! I have no print detail on my right index finger or thumb from a 75w QH bulb in a lathe mounted work light. 75w may not sound like much, but when the glass is being heated for an hour or two......OUCH!

---EDIT--- I just re-read my reply and realised something, I am discussing masking the lamp, like the old blackout lamps, while you suggested shining through a screen (no contact)....which is what I believe the Camtronics' system uses. An overhead projector with masking applied to provide a fine, bright, white line. Would this work with the free software?? or does it need the contrast of a colored line? ---EDIT---

BTW, It would appear the answer to my original question would be...save my money, there are decent alternatives to buying the software.

ATB,
Iain

Iain, what I have in mind is a quartz lamp possibly with a piece of glass rod to give a preliminary concentration of its light onto a glass microscope slide(for example).
The first face to be made translucent - paint/tissue paper/whatever - and the outer face to have two pieces of opaque tape with a 0.004" slit between them. With a decent lens( about 4" focal length), project an image 4' and it ought to give you what you need.
Problems -
1. Is the white light ok for the David software.
I think it is, but if not make the filter red instead of white.
2. there might be diffraction lines with the slit image.
I think the camera settings in the software will enable you to reduce the effect to a point where it doesn't interfere.

I've just thought that an old slide projector,with the "slit" on a slide, might be just the job, but you'd have to mount it on a stand to take the weight ! And I'm not sure if the lamp will be too happy being waggled about.

John

Persew,
Is that the image straight from David, or has it been processed?
If that is raw, compared to what I get from a mechanical probe, I am very impressed.


Yes, are raw data but viewed with Meshlab.

Iain -I've just projected a white line 2-3mm wide about 4' onto a wall. the "slide" in the projector was two pieces of black vinyl tape on the surface of a glass slide - no translucent layer at all.
I've not tried it yet with the David set up as I'm still trying to sort out camera problems.
Sven on the David website said it will work, and awaits my posting when I get to that stage.
Perhaps you can beat me to it as I've just managed to stab my hand with a piece of glass, so I am now going to have a very large drink, and the timetable for this evening is already set out.
So it will be next year before I can proceed !
Regards
John

Since we seem to be veering off into the "how to" end, how about we move this discussion to John's thread "3d for Crazies".

Thanks,

Iain

Iain - your absolutely right. My apologies for rambling on(as usual) and getting off topic. Back to the other thread.

:wave:

Hi!

I continued with the scan tests this week, and i got big improvements.

I tryed to record a scan session with a VHS cam connected to a dvd recorder, convert the dvd to avi and send it to DAVID via SplitCam software. Results are a bit better but is a very large process for the little improvement and i decide no investigate more on this way for now.

Then i back to the webcam method,k but this time mounting the laser on a tripod with the Z axis moved with a crank and i expended more time adjusting the camera and the object. The results on the attachment.

Next step is study the SCANALYZE software for align and merge scans...

Persew,
Looks pretty decent.Have gotten myself a new webcam as David didn't like my old one, and am trying John's idea with the slide projector instead of the laser.
If I can figure out how to do screenshots, I should be able to show some results in the next few days.

Iain

Iain, have you picked up recent posts from the David forum, that you don't even need a slit ?
The software recognizes the contrast edge between light and shadow, so even an the edge of the projector beam will work.
Couple that with someone's idea of projecting onto a mirror, then use the reflected beam. you then only need to move the mirror !
Steal one out of an old scanner - narrow and front silvered.

I'm leaving the David approach for the time being as I can't work out how to use my 4mb pixel camera. The video it takes are at a resolution of about 150 x 130, whereas the stills are about 2000 x 1800 - very frustrating.

John

John,
Have you looked at the AccuTrans 3d software?
Has nothing to do with laser (or beer) scanning, but might be another way to do what you want.
I'm trying to get Scanalyze working, but it keeps giving me fits and errors, maybe someday it will suddenly all make sense, and WORK!

ATB,

Morning Iain.
I should have updated my last post, but been somewhat busy with a reluctant campervan of late.
On the David forum, one of the boss men says that it needs a narrow beam as it takes an average position from each edge(shadow/light and light/shadow) in each pixel column to use as the data point.
Curiously this doesn't explain how someone has managed to post a 3d model in the gallery of a wooden lay-figure using just a single edge !!!
So the jury is still out on that one.
I'll have a look at the accutrans over the weekend, so thanks for the pointer.
John

Evening John, (or at least it is in your part of the world..)

I know what you mean about lack of time, I had what should have been minor day surgery earlier this week and have been absolutely knackered with the pain killers!
Troubleshooting software issues and large amounts of prescription pain killers do NOT seem to work well together..I Have been trying to find answers to setting up David, and think I will shelve it for now. Maybe next week I can look at it again,

ATB
Iain

Iain - Take care.
John