Don't Buy a 3D Scanner! Use Photogrammetry Instead!

[@tf841]

Hey man, great tips, Update for people trying this, reality capture can now be used for free!

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Awesome tip!! I gave this a try and this software looks even better than the ones I recommended. The interface is easy to use like Zephyr and almost all the tips I gave on Zephyr would apply. It's a more professional interface. The models it produced using the same dataset have less errors and the export format seems more compatible with CAD. The only issue is you have to download unreal engine which is a 15 GB file, as well as the epic game installer, but other than that this looks like the best option. It's just a better, and free for all features, Zephyr. I'm pinning your comment, thanks for pointing this out!

[@tf841]

@@BuildSomethingAuto Great, yes it is very easy to use ( I just scanned parts of my truck with it) You should only need a Epic games account and the installer form there website to use it, but I could be wrong cause I use it with epic games launcher as I have this on my PC already. Hope this helps, thanks for the pin!

[@SamBrown-mz9cd]

I am also a mechy with a first gen explorer and I absolutely love these videos! Seeing the engineering used in your videos is always awesome to see!

[@Dan-vq4pz]

Cant wait to show this to the mechanical engineers, thanks for the upload

[@GuyPorter211]

I was just thinking about how great it would be to 3d scan my truck for something along these lines. Appreciate the info you put out for us

[@psychoholicslag4801]

You answered questions I didn't know I had. Never seen any of these programs, but that is a little unbelievable that a 3D model can be made from photos. Silly me, I've been using tape measures, angle finders, pencils and papers to make cardboard mockups. I'm getting too old for this stuff. Good to see the rig out the wild. Looks good.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Hey now, cardboard is still a wonderful way to make mock ups! Thank you 😁

[@MrGTAmodsgerman]

Your method still worth in some situation over actual photoscans. They take a lot of more time then just using a pen, paper and cardboard.

[@lukewhile]

Photogrammetry is great for virtual assets/stuff where tight dimensions aren’t critical. For complex engineering projects that need to mate to other attachmentpoints/surfaces, it’s a great way to measure once cut twice/three times.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

I still contend a hobbiest 3D scanner won't do you any better. If you have critical dimensions, you'll have to measure them by hand whether you use photogrammetry or a hobby 3D scanner. Scanners/probes capable of real reverse engineering (or quality control as they're often used for in industry) cost tens of thousands for small parts, or for doing something the size of a car maybe hundreds of thousands. Whereas a pair of calipers and some photos hardly costs you anything.

[@ArktikosAdventures]

Actually, 3D scanning is used for precise measurements all the time. I work in the aerospace industry and I currently use a system that is accurate down to .025 mm which is amazing considering that it's extremely fast as well. Yes, it costs as much as a new luxury car but digital metrology is a thing and I'm sure that as the technology matures, it will start to trickle down into the consumer realm eventually.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

True, nowadays I see it in industry for Quality Control often (the tech didn't seem to be good enough for this even 10 years ago). Like you said though, completely inaccessibly expensive for "hobby" prices 😅. I'd love to see the technology trickle down, but right now I just don't have much faith in the hobby scanners that so many youtubers are being paid to sell nowadays, not when photogrammetry exists for free and seems to do as good a job.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Remember, regardless of what scanning system or software you use, actually measure every critical dimension! Even with an expensive scanner, don't rely on the scan, get out your calipers/micrometer/compass and verify what the computer told you. It makes for much less rework in the end...

[@othoapproto9603]

OR CAD (Cardboard Aided Design)

[@tcurdt]

I wish it was as easy as you make it sound. Photogrammetry software is a bit of a sad story really. At least when you are a non-windows person that might not have nvidia cuda card. The best bet seems to be to find something that runs on the phone (and probably (or sadly?) uses the cloud to build the model. But so far I have not found anything of convincing quality.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

I haven't found anything that runs on a phone that is very usable yet (tried 3 or 4 apps), but I also don't have a lidar phone that likely makes a big difference. I don't think phones have the processing power to do real time 3D scanning, so they take too many shortcuts to make good scans. I do think having a cuda card is a huge improvement on speed like you said, and I think that's why zephyr is so much faster for me than meshroom - zephyr is graphics accelerated with cuda. However I still made it work on meshroom, there was just more waiting around. However the software I recommended really was as easy as I made it seem. 50 seconds to 2 minutes of handheld video, 150-400 photos, cranked up the presets and almost zero cleanup other than deleting unwanted points. Zephyr is even easier than meshroom, but it is paid which is why I emphasized meshroom so much (free). Granted I'm overlooking the fact that it didn't capture the reflective windows, there were a couple holes, and the body was bumpy in places, but it didn't make a difference for what I was doing. In fact the front suspension/undercarriage where I needed the most accurate scan came out nearly flawless. For some use cases I'm sure it'd struggle, but that's the same with 3D scanners. The software really has come a long way.

[@tcurdt]

@@BuildSomethingAuto you are missing my point: argue that again for a mac user or a linux user without a nvidia card.

[@amorton94]

​@tcurdt Your point is "woe is me". Nobody cares. You picked an operating system, deal with the consequences.

[@tcurdt]

That's not my point. But given that tone - I could not care less 🤷‍♂

[@amorton94]

@@tcurdt "At least when you are a non-windows person" "Woe is me, I picked a non-windows operating system and can't use what you show in this video." That is exactly your point.

[@kyleberggren760]

@BisforBuild this might be a good stop gap for you until you a 3D scanner that is perfect for you.

[@tumthanachat7471]

i need sofware about CIFS .

[@MrGTAmodsgerman]

Sorry but your assumption about measurement and what scanners are for is totally wrong. Especially 3d scanners are designed to reconstruct things accurately for thing like science, autopsy, medicine, archival purposes, architectural reconstructions and so on. And Photogrammetry in it'self exists because it was invented for the military. But a actual 3d scanner is limited in what they can do. They are models who make more precise reconstructions then other ones. That's just a question of your budget. There is even some car KZbinr who measured an perfect example model with a affordable 3D scanner and it can work. Actual 3d scanners for hobbyiest just often fail because of the software. To get something working for now you shouldn't go below the 1k dollar or Euro mark. Photogrammetry on the other hand can even deliver reconstructions on quality level of a 40k dollar or more 3d scanner. The main benefit of Photogrammetry is that you don't have to deal with limited scan ranges (tiny object scanner, large object scanner) and also don't need to have a powerful computer live at the scene doing all the processing while also it's a way cheaper option. But in order to reach such quality levels, you have to do it right. Just scan for ex. a ruler with your scan and scale the scene right in the software. Get an actual camera and into camera settings and don't choose bad lightning situations like a sunny day. Avoid reflections, avoid hard shadows and general dark spots and camera settings are important to don't confuse the software with blurry images. Your object should have surface texture in what ever form it is to get accurately reconstructed. Like dirt/mud or baby powder. You have to get into it, getting a actual quality camera setup to it properly. Sure, Smartphones can do that also. But you will be very limited. They will be an good entry point which none of these other options offer. The better your images are, the more you get. And that's what makes it also so powerful because there is so much you can do.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Yup, as far as the budget question I just cant see hobby project car builders justifying $1000 or more on a scanner, the moneys just better spent elsewhere for one off builds. That price tag only makes sense when youre a youtuber getting your scanner for free, or if youre earning money with it (or spending tax payer money to buy it 😅). Good tips on getting better scans. I used my phone and did it with the worst case outside on a sunny day to demonstrate that even with the minimum viable setup its still possible, and that you dont even need to coat your entire car in baby powder or 3D scan targets, or having professional lighting, or whatever else. Maybe next time Ill use my real camera, set up real lights, etc, to see how it comes out when you do put in maximum effort. That would probably be worth doing for scanning the undercarriage to pickup suspension mounting points and such.

[@nimrodsmusic]

You're paying for ease of use and quality of results. Your results aren't usable and the work flow is extensive.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Have you tried it? I designed a front bumper based on this scan and others, it was definitely usable for that! Im not sure how much more the average DIYer would need... I havent tried the newest versions of these scanners, maybe theyve gotten better, but 5 or 10 years ago they werent any better from a quality or workflow perspective than this, not in the $500-$2000 price range at least. Perhaps one day Ill try a newer scanner and see how much better theyve gotten, but at this point I have no reason to with how good photogrammetry actually is.

[@adamfilipowicz9260]

"just as good of better" without doing side by side comparison

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

This channel doesnt make any money, I cant go spending $1k buying a scanner for a video 😅. Some channels that I know have videos on them you could watch for comparison are superfast matt, making for motorsport, clough42, etc. Find a video where they do a whole car rather than just a small part for apples to apples, and make sure you note how much it cost them (well most of them get the scanner for free, i mean how much itd cost you to buy the one they use).

[@adamfilipowicz9260]

@@BuildSomethingAuto totally understandable that you cant afford one. neither can I but then perhaps reserve judgement that its better..as you dont know from personal experience.

[@zviper]

@@adamfilipowicz9260 Photogrammetry is definitely better. For him in this use case. Heck i scan cars, houses and land with a drone using photogrammetry. Its 100% the best choice for my use case every day of the week.

[@AlexusMaximusDE]

Photogrammetry requires much more manual clean up than a good 3D scanner and it takes much longer to get results. So for people with much more time than money, maybe photogrammetry is the way to go.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Thanks for the comment. It might be slower than a good 3D scanner, but its faster than a bad 3D scanner 😅. Im not sure you could pay hobbiest level prices and do as well as photogrammetry, but cost is relative and the technology gets better every day. For what its worth I didnt require very much cleanup at all for what I was doing here. However for this use case things didnt need to be perfect.

[@bj_]

When you enter the realm of people that actually use 3d scanners, you'll find it's mostly manufacturers trying to avoid bottlenecking their operations, and consumers that think if they use industrial tools they'll get industrial results. Which one of those groups of people do you think automotive KZbinrs are more likely to be in?

[@MrGTAmodsgerman]

There is a lot you could do to speed up the process like if you can, make the background plain none reflective black directly in the photo scene that then won't generate mesh you don't need. But also like in better software like RealityCapture you can just generate a previewmodel that takes not even 2 Seconds and use that to generate alpha masks that will be your black background equivalent. Just for scenarios like the car where you can't do it the other way. Many professionals use photogrammetry. But they do it properly not so careless. With like very good drones that have a programmed flight route that do the photos themselfes. Or just scanning rigs where the camera moves onto some rail system and make a photo automaticly. It's just your freedom what you want to do and how much you want to optimize it. Where as with 3d scanners you will be limited by what you bought. And they also age fast. You then have to rely onto one software doing all the work correctly and hopeing you get updates and fixes while you also can't upgrade them with newer tech. While with Photogrammetry you can use the same photos with different software, cross work them and all kind of stuff and the reconstruction process can now be even be done totally different with AI to generate a mesh like with NeRF or Gaussian Splatting.