iPhone 3D Scanning vs Professional 3D Scanner

[@antoninbesse795]

This is exactly what a good KZbin channel should be - delivering engaging, non clickbatey content about things viewers didn’t realise were interesting. Thanks Matt.

[@augustmartin3393]

We might want to mention Matt's Magical "gift for gab": Useful information infused with clever humor, including anecdotes and exaggerated visual cues, which aids the viewers in being better informed about 3D scanner features (along with making purchasing decisions). Yes folks, it's not "what you say"...it's "how you say it" that makes the difference for it to have any meaning. Preposterous comparisons can be effective in audience recall; the lesson here centers around "in all practicality".

[@Niki_Parvanov]

Truer words were never spoken

[@zavatone]

non clickbaity*

[@chipyk92]

I work in one of those professional 3D scanner companies in an engineering position. You are the first hobbyist on KZbin that I've seen who said "professional tools are obviously much better but probably not worth it for hobbyists", instead of the "iphone does the same or better, don't bother with professional 3D scanners" which seems to be the consensus. Thank you for being objective and actually taking the time and putting in the effort to form an educated opinion instead of spewing clickbaity garbage.

[@Todestelzer]

Revopoint scanners are ok but not good. There is a difference between high end scanners and hobby scanners for sure. Most of it is the software. Einstar has really good software because it uses the software of higher end scanners from the same manufacturer. That said I ordered a Creality Raptor this week. First metrology blue laser scanner for a affordable price. Now I own a Creality Raptor, Einstar, Einscan-SP and Revopoint mini. 😂

[@KhataarFelMataar]

@@Todestelzerhi which of those would you recommend for automotive work?

[@collynfalzitto6]

The shop I'm at got an EinScan for dirt cheap like 2500$ used. To be honest will never mess with a cheap scanner again. Mainly because the details are unmatched and the fact it can scan colors and even can pick up the masking marks from a paint job from 20 years ago.

[@hairyneil]

How is it at scanning small parts? Might see if my work feel like treating me, I mean, investing in some totally necessary equipment.

[@collynfalzitto6]

@@hairyneil it's fantastic the smallest part We have scanned was about 2" in diameter. The scan came out amazing. In fact the Ein Scan we have was used to scan a person's face with precise accuracy. To give an idea it could do eyelashes with really good details.

[@RC-fp1tl]

How did your shop get one so cheap? Asking for a friend, because that's pretty awesome?

[@collynfalzitto6]

@@RC-fp1tl my boss bought it from a multi million dollar company who offered it to us because their company had just got the latest and greatest Ein Scanner. We do some machining and machine repair for them every so often so that's how they knew about us.

[@JimmyNahlousVisuals]

@@collynfalzitto6 That's quite a steal! good deal. There is no way those deals will come around again.

[@WayneEarls]

The good thing is, people like you buying, using, and giving feedback on things like this,, are paving the road for future products to work better.

[@anomamos9095]

A couple of things that I have considered doing when I get around to scanning something. Make scale markers. These are things that will show up in the scan that are of a precise known size, usually a small cube and a square frame you can place on or around the object. Set up a frame of some sort around and over the object that you can use to steady your hand while scanning. The rafters in a garage might do the trick if you tie a line that you can hold with the scanning hand so you can pan in a stable arc. Turn tables are a must.

[@dfgaJK]

4:56 Put a few markers on the extremes of the object, then scale it in software after scanning. You can even average your multiple scaling references to get sub polygon accuracy.

[@lucazehnder1695]

yes! photogrammetry can be very precise.. he should have tested it.. :(

[@S_Roach]

This just gave me an idea. Use stickers of known dimensions.

[@rodrigomartinelli741]

@@S_Roach just throw two rulers on different directions.. or a square, so you can scale X and Y easier..

[@ivinballen1251]

Or print markers straight from reality capture. Make a “scale bar”.In ppi this would probably cost less than $5.

[@drumboarder1]

@@rodrigomartinelli741 I wouldn't trust the rulers to be come out without being garbled, me thinks the markers at certain points and manual measuring them would be best

[@noiwonttellyoumyname.4385]

One thing that can make your Revopoint work a *lot* better is getting one of those stabilized selfie-stick things. Once I started using one of those, I discovered that the quality of my scans improved dramatically.

[@nicolask1901]

A gimbal?

[@noiwonttellyoumyname.4385]

@@nicolask1901 yeah, basically. Thing that lets you do steadicam stuff with your camera.

[@mice3d]

Great tip, I've just ordered the 2nd one to replace my kinex 360.

[@schwemmm]

good point!

[@maxcactus7]

Happy New Year, Matt! Thanks for all your great content in 2021. Looking forward to another fun, exciting, dangerous year of your projects. All hail the algorithm!

[@rallymax2]

T-shirt cannons are for my kids to watch. I’ll watch you for real engineering. Thanks for pulling this together, it’s great to learn where the state of the art is with 3-D capture.

[@tbmike23]

The software is what makes the difference in hand scanning, or using photogrammetry. Neither can ever replace the inherent precision of terrestrial lasers, however they can get close enough for many applications.

[@ianteare-thomas8604]

I appreciate your content so very much. I find your videos so compelling, not because they are comedic genius but because they are so information dense. You give info how you got the info why you got the info make a quip that makes me chuckle repeat like 50 times and the video is less than 20 minutes long. Any other youtuber conveying as much info as you do would take 45 minutes and would need a part 2.

[@craterinahole]

Thanks for the comparison. I've been passively interested in scanning kit car bodies and making form-fitting body panels and I learned quite a bit from your video. It's reassuring to know that I don't need a pro scanner for the kind of project I want to do.

[@TheKitMurkit]

Passively interested. That's an interesting and also precise phrase I'll try to remember and use sometime.

[@Kruglord]

Hey man, great videos! I'm a geomatics engineer with a masters degree in optical metrology, specializing in digital imaging systems. This topic is RIGHT in my wheel house! First, great summary, there's very little I would add in the broad strokes. On the topic of photogrammety, I have mixed feelings. For your use case, its would be _possible_ to get sub-mm 3D models, but I doubt it would be worth your time. To do so, you would need a decent camera with a fixed focal length (i.e. at least a manual focus, no auto focus), you would need to calibrate the camera (it's possible to do that yourself, but it is very finicky, and easy to trick yourself you did a good job), and you would need to some kind of reliable scale reference. For us geos, we would probably use a total station to survey in a couple targets at the extreme extents of the measurement volume. For better results you your scanners, you probably want more "registration features," which could be those white dots, but I personally have used ping ping balls with great success. They're light-weight, highly spherical, a consistent radius, and if you hit them with a bit of matte white, also have consistent illumination across their surface. You could probably hot glue, or even super-glue the on the surface of the engine for you models, then just knock them off when your done. Just be careful not to deform their shape when you glue them, neither through heat, chemistry nor pressure. Also, **until you need to flip you engine over**, adding a nice checker-board pattern to your work bench would greatly improve your feature tracking, with no need for the ping pong balls. It's really important that during a scan, the subject (i.e. the engine) does not move relative to your registration targets (i.e. the check-board or the ping pong balls). You could also put the two together, use the pattern on the bench to scan in each orientation, and use the ping pong balls to register each scan together after you flip it over. Let me know if you have any quetsions. BTW, if you care to read it, I could link you my masters thesis, which features the ping pong balls in chapter 3

[@HyperSculptor]

Ping pong balls sound quite large in diameter, how many would you use on an engine? Do you mean using just a few as "general reference points" to help with the tracking, with no use on the actual surface data?

[@Kruglord]

@@HyperSculptor The answer, like all answers in engineering is "it depends". The purpose of the spherical targets in my example is to allow you to reliably register two or more different scans of your subject, even when the subject has otherwise changed orientation relative to its surroundings. Put another way, the purpose of the white dots is mostly to help the scanner track its own position _during_ the scan, the purpose of the spherical targets (which could be ping pong balls, but could be other things) is to allow the user to reliably match the subject's surface _after_ the scans are done. The spherical targets would probably _also_ help the scanner track its own position, but that's not why I suggested them. And yes, they would be a bit large, and obviously if your registration targets are blocking significant portions of your subject, that's a problem, but you do want them to be large enough that their surface measurements can be mapped to a sphere with reasonable precision and accuracy. Too small = not enough details = bad sphere model = bad registration.

[@Kruglord]

@@HyperSculptor Oh also, if you're only using the ping pong balls to match subsequent scans, I'd say you want a minimum of 4 visible in every position you're scanning from. So if you're doing two scans, then you only need 4 as long as you make sure you can see them all in both scans.

[@HyperSculptor]

@@Kruglord thanks for sharing your experience. I actually like the ping ping tek, am going to test it with photogrammetry and see if it helps the software. Anything optical is fascinating, my background is sculpting the human form in clay etc, then integrating digital tools years later. There are great optical techniques, some of them were already used thousands of years ago.

[@RicCross]

@@Kruglord I’m curious as to your opinion regarding using 3d printed cubes or similar items placed on the scan target. Obviously at bit more difficult to obtain than ping pong balls. Checkerboard table top seems to be a very good recommendation as well. Seems like a frame with a phone holder and skate wheels may be worth experimenting with too…

[@jaredp4478]

Somehow, you're already 3 steps ahead on everything I've attempted to understand. Thanks for the reassuring conclusion on the state of consumer 3D scanners, I was looking for the missing piece of the market for too long... It's looking like the Revopoint Pop 2 might bring the bar up a bit.

[@chrisschlis9440]

I like your projects! Never thought of using a scanner. But I KNEW you would present the subject well... so here I am.

[@AlecMoody]

FWIW with some surface treatment (developer spray, baby powder, etc) and a decent SLR you can get more detail out of photogrammetry than most pro scanners. Dimensional accuracy depends on the quality of your scale reference but I get very accurate results when I compare caliper measurements to scan dimensions. The point here is to say, there are a lot of middle ground options between phone scan and pro scan tool. Quality becomes less of a differentiating factor and its more about how much effort and time it takes to get your scan result. Processing images in good software like reality capture (expensive) requires a decently powerful computer(also expensive) and a lot of time.

[@betims]

Well, we saw it. We saw the R1000RR engine and now we want the video ASAP. Can we call your new/old car a Bonda? :P

[@SuperfastMatt]

The BMW engine is not going in the Honda. The Honda is getting another Honda engine. It's in the video near the end sitting next to the BMW engine. What's the BMW going into? It's in next week's video! There's also a pretty big hint hidden in this video.

[@igorschannel]

@@SuperfastMatt IS IT GOING INTO THAT SMART??? @6:43

[@vitornuevo]

@@SuperfastMatt I believe the BMW engine goes to the Smart. Am I right? looking forward to the next videos

[@PointBlank65]

@@igorschannel that would follow the pattern of keeping the brands the same as Smart is made by BMW last I checked.

[@arnoldcp11]

I assume it's going into the tool chest, it's SO unfast to have to roll it around manually. Interested to see what kind of transmission you use to drive the casters.

[@prmpfbubub]

Great video! I'm obviously one of the eight people who are very interested in 3D Scanners, but I am also just a tinkerer who doesn't want to pay 10.000 USD or more for a descent scanner. I made about two scans with my Revopoint with one of them being just about usable, but the part was so simple I could have just measured it with calipers and now the scanner is collecting dust. I hope there will be something available soon for around 1.000 USD, that would be great. Please let us know if you find a scanner in that price range.

[@JohnDoe_toetag]

A scanner that goes down on you.? Decent, descent.

[@johnczukkermann3552]

The structure scanner attaches to an iPad and costs like $300-$400 I think…it works extremely well

[@Luis-gz3oo]

Not even 1000, 2000 would still be an acceptable price tbh

[@Blox117]

can 3d scanners be used to make gears for an electric motor? or is the resolution too low?

[@unpersonableme1805]

It's really weird to describe usd with a period instead of a comma

[@ernestordz]

First time a KZbin video answers all my questions and questions I did not know I had. Great info.

[@100PercentJake]

For what it's worth, I found this video 10x more fascinating than a t-shirt cannon. Have you put any thought/research into Kinect-based solutions? I know those have been around for a decade now and are likely very far from state-of-the-art but this seems like a problem that is 10% hardware 90% software/algorithm, and I'm curious how the Kinect's community solutions compare to commercial ones.

[@SianaGearz]

@@lesdmark Yeah the hardware has a focusing range for the structured light of maybe between 60cm and 5m, with the golden range being preferably far enough from these extremes. You can't even get it closer to the subject to get that much more detail in.

[@nordic-chan]

I use an Xbox One Kinect and tbqh its not much better than the Revopoint. The software is probably a bit better on the Kinect tho since it was made by Microsoft. That and Kinect 2s can be had for next to nothing used.

[@brianboni4876]

If you're scanning an old Jag you might as well add the serial number to the file description. I've worked on a few old Jags and they are as one off as any purpose built race car I've worked on. I helped on repairing a damaged passenger door hinge and latch on an XK120 that was in an accident. We had access to two cars the same year and found there are very few interchangeable parts, even the doors would not fit each other. The hinges looked liked they were flame cut and all three were made to different shapes. Inside the door skin is a wood frame and even that was made differently across the three cars. I'm not saying the cars weren't well made they were just repeatability wasn't highly sought after.

[@titanpdr775]

What a great video. To the point, not a bunch of wasted time blabbing on and on lol. I wish all comparison videos were this efficient! All the knowledge right up front the whole time. Exactly what I was looking for. Nice work!

[@MrLackeydude]

I started out engineering in metrology and got to work with ATOS scanners (manual and automated) and Romer arms. It spoiled me. Structured blue light scanning is amazing but the cost is so high only large OEMs can justify the cost. I'd love to have an ATOS in my garage. 3D scanning is such a game changer when you realize what you can do with that data.

[@cncgeneral]

Been using GOM systems for many years, I tried a $40k Zeiss handheld scanner recently and was shocked at how bad it was in comparison, resolution, speed and ease of use.

[@MrLackeydude]

@@cncgeneral yeah GOM is way ahead. Interesting that zeiss bought GOM. I will be watching to see what they do with it.

[@ChaoticEnigma-]

I've used a romer arm too, that thing is a piece of technological wizardry.

[@chrislee7817]

I agree with your point about the scaling problem using photogrammetry but including a ruler in the images resolves this. Would love to see you do a video using meshroom or something similar just to see how it does.

[@mfx1]

The Pop 2 looks like a big improvement on the Pop although it looks like it still has issues with certain surfaces but it comes with stickers and you can use a temporary spray on covering to make scanning easier.

[@stergiouioannis3967]

We professionally use the Arte Leo scanner. Very expensive (out of the scope of what you mention in the video (garage work) But gets the job done without problems. With a bit of experience, it never loses track of where you are, and even when it does it easily finds it back soon enough. In software later on you can manually stitch together parts of the same scan, but the "automatic stitching" of the software works so well that we never do it manually. Last but not least we never use markers, and we can even scan black surfaces. Have a look online, borrow one (or ask for a demonstration). It worths the video -review if you have the chance.

[@gmodesike]

Pop scanner scan can be corrected by pausing scan and hitting back a few times and then hit play again. It will pick back up just before where it fell off.

[@UrbExGear]

Thats a good quality content, I've watched your video entirely without skipping stuff as I did for half of that t-shirt cannon you have mentioned in the end

[@bwzimm4972]

Thank you for the review/comparison. These topics are hard to find and the tech is changing all the time, so, thanks for your time and experience!

[@mrp19285]

What a lot of people do not understand is going from Mesh/point cloud to solid model. It’s not just a easy let me scan this and I’ll have a model. I professionally use a Creaform Metrascan 750 for metrology work. We have scanned random things and reverse engineering parts and depending on what we scanned it was a pain or not.

[@TacohMann]

It's a lot of work. For one of my graphics classes I implemented a surface splatting algorithm for point cloud data (basically just surface interpolation from point clouds). It took most of the semester just to recreate the work that other people had already done, and it still wasn't 100% functional. It's obviously not exactly the same thing, but it's pretty similar to how scanners convert the data they capture to models.

[@mrp19285]

@@TacohMann Yea same concept. I scanned my Subaru fog light mount and man even making that a model took forever. Now doing a door cover like Matt was doing wouldn't be too bad. With software I have at work I can pretty much make a surface model in minutes.

[@oldskool9783]

I use a regular camera and photogrammetry software, and my output is phenomenal and accurate af.

[@RamiTamimi]

This is Fantastic. The iPhone LiDAR Scanner is incredible!

[@macca7941]

Just purchased this exact scanner for work. This video made me happy I did. Well done.

[@Danny.._]

me: "what is a video about 3d scanning doing in my subscriptions?" -about to scroll past when i see the uploader- "oh it's from superfastmatt? in that case i'll watch it; i'm sure it'll be interesting" and it certainly was. i love your videos, you make everything interesting even if i don't particularly care about the subject or when you go into something that's way beyond my knowledge base lol

[@sierralarars]

I use an app called EM3D with my iPhone. I’ve found the measurements it gives me are accurate. Then again I’m using it for clay sculptures and then retopologising to get a less dense mesh. Works for my needs.

[@BuildSomethingAuto]

Dang I was hoping the news would be better on this. If you can get away with modeling 1 face at a time what I do is take a picture with a ruler laying on the part you need a model of. Then in solidworks (and other CAD software too, Im sure) you can insert a picture into a sketch. After using the ruler to set the scale you can just trace the picture into the sketch. As long as the part isnt too big (or camera too close) to get perspective errors this works incredibly well. But isnt 3D 😔. Very quick and simple for 2D sketches though!

[@KeithOlson]

One advantage of using an actual digital camera is that you have a broad choice of lenses and the sensor is ***MUCH*** larger. I used CHDK on a Canon running a custom script to automatically create focus-stacked, exposure-bracked image sets for macro work. It would be trivial to add a rotating platform and Arduino control to the system so I could automatically take 360-degree image sets for use in photogrammetry/etc.

[@Erowens98]

I hope 3d scanning tech does what 3d Printing did. And sees a massive uptick in quality coupled with a huge slash in price over a decade or so. I want to be able to laser scan my cars to model them into Assetto Corsa. But right now, I just can't afford to. The ultimate endgame would be to scan the local back road I like to drive at night.

[@t1mmy13]

I've used Heges before, just to add and FYI, it also has ipad-via-wifi-to-remote-capabilities built in. Thanks for making this video, very comprehensive, been here before and back then I was looking for a video like this but couldn't find it. Now I know I don't/do need to spend many bucks to buy a hardware scanner based on the project :)

[@Bag_o_rocks]

Your first 3d scanner video is how i discovered your channel. If only the algorithm showed me earlier.

[@JohnnieBravo1]

Photogrammetry is being eclipsed by LiDAR. However, using it from photographs, the images need to be taken from a calibrated camera, and lens distortions mapped and corrected for, or the "sensors" (digital cameras on the phone) distortions calibrated. They can be very accurate when used correctly, but any distortions that are not calibrated out, it doesn't take a lot of distortion to create large measurement errors, especially in the vertical plane (relative to the position of the camera..... if the camera is moving around, the vertical plane is also moving around with it and that error gets distributed ALL over the place). (I was a photogrammetrist (aerial photography, surface mapping) in a previous lifetime, btw). I love your channel.

[@Relatablename]

In my experience using both I've found that LIDAR is great for efficient large scale mapping but can't capture small objects in a meaningful capacity. The good thing about photogrammetry is that size is all relative so as long as the camera can see it pretty much anything is fair game.

[@bharatkhatwani9677]

There is a relation between balance improvement and the facilitation of sensory feedback related to the activation of the plantar cutaneous mechanoreceptors. From a clinical point of view, the application of additional tactile cues may have therapeutic benefits in relation to fall prevention or to improve specific types of chronic pain. Postural Insoles are a great way to help optimize joint alignment. They use wedge and frequency technology to target specialized sensory receptors in the skin of your feet, allowing your brain to create new neural pathways to "activate" otherwise "lazy" muscles.

[@alittlebitintellectual7361]

I was positively surprised when i 3d printed a Touch guard for an ABB RCD and just found the whole cad model (at least the outer shell) on their website free to download. Made modelling around it much, much easier

[@808v1]

I was literally looking at financing a Peel 1 or 2 scanner, this has made me reconsider...THANK YOU!

[@danamccarthy5514]

"There will be like 8 people who watch this video", has 7.7K likes. Don't underestimate the combination of engineers, fabricators, and 3d printing geeks.

[@bigfilsing]

Absolutely with you on the +/- 1000 buck scanner option . I often wonder why the price of good quality scanners hasn't dropped in recent years. Loved the vid Cheers

[@JimmyNahlousVisuals]

I sell Lavanti3D ProScan Scanners, new to the market and coming in cheaper and BETTER than Einscan Sturctured Light Scanners -dual fields of views and 3x the capture rate. Also comes with free software, none of that subscription stuff... They start at $7500 USD.

[@Nanan00]

I have used large expensive commercial scanners like the FARO and even they are not as good as you would hope, models generated through them still require a ton of tweaking to be useful. The lack of progress in this field is one of the reasons we still don't have reliable 100% automated vehicles, they need the lidar scanners and software that can determine what things are to be bullet proof and basically boilerplate level refined.

[@Wo_ist_hier_das_Klo]

As a engineer that likes to wrench on cars myself, this is my favorite car channel on KZbin!

[@MickeyC3040]

I really wish there was an in between. There are a lot of things I've struggled with using iPhone scans and measuring for my Ecoboost swap. I could also convince some buddies to go in on it for their projects as well

[@andrewrance]

Obviously this item is the perfect candidate for a tool library, I have borrowed thermal cameras to detect thermal gaps in my house from my local library in Melbourne, Australia.

[@jesscneal]

I own and use a Creaform Handyscan 700 for my business on a weekly basis. Having the detail is essential for some projects. This thing will realistically go down to 3-5 thousandths but it was also $50k. I do simplify and reduce my meshes. Depends on the job. Einscan makes nice scanners for the most part. LIke you said, anything under about $5k is a toy/joke including the iPhone Lidar but they do have their uses.

[@BenWilson24]

I've used the creaforms for a few years now for work and love them. Much easier to use than our zeiss scanners, but there is a tradeoff there obviously. I also built a scanner with a kinect, but it was clear pretty quickly why that's not used for actual reverse engineering or inspection...

[@BB-km5nv]

Sir how can I export my scanning data to the cnc machine

[@jesscneal]

@@BB-km5nv You can't. You need to model it first.

[@BB-km5nv]

@@jesscneal what about Stl , obj , ply format

[@BB-km5nv]

@@jesscneal revopoint working on ply ,obj , stl and then my cnc machine can handle the drawings

[@lynxoflight72]

I think 3d scanning is really great, and it has alot of applications apart from engineering. its nice to see a comparison between different levels of the tech and if they can make the professional ones cheaper, then i might consider getting a scanner some day.

[@taavikoppel1769]

There are also 3D measuring arms. If you are only concerned about a few mounting point locations than scanning the whole thing. They run for 20'000+ €. But its more widely used and its more likely you can find a service that has these. No paint or reflective points required.

[@Dug6666666]

We have a FARO arm at work with a 3D scanner attachment. Best of both worlds, you can scan the object and also superimpose very accurate flat plains and hole centre data with the arm probe to construct CAD features later of key location features. Scanner losing its place never seems to be an issue, it probably cross references to the arms position in space.

[@stevewuertz3598]

Glad to see this market overview and to see you've exceeded the 8 views you expected. Seems to me this might make for an interesting side gig. Start up costs under 10K and interesting work as well

[@stoef]

As always a great video. I love your storytelling with the simple cards with text for the sections in the video. The themed music for certain parts of the video is also amazing.

[@williampflugfelder7099]

Part of the audience that's there. Definitely a market for mid-priced scanner. Well done.

[@metzenw86]

I bought an Ein Scan 3 years ago for $10,000 with the Reverse engineering package. It's fairly accurate if you use it correctly. I can get hole locations to within .002", sometimes better with it. I've designed a couple parts with it. My favorite was adapting a brake caliper to a different model motorcycle. It came out flawless.

[@andriesdupreez4170]

I think 3D scanning on any phone and CAD experience is amazing this is truly good nie just to learn how to use it all

[@Printedperformance]

I actually just used the creality CR-Scan 01 on my car. Sprayed it down with an iso/baby powder mix. It took a long time, but it did really well with the details, it even picked up some of the flaws in the paint.

[@fericyde]

Having taken quite a wild ride attempting to use photogrammetry (meshroom and some other stuff) to do similar stuff to what you're talking about here, I can confirm it's a real rats nest and the part about scaling -- I've run into exactly that issue with it. I'm very happy you did this because of course I'm now targeted with tons of advertising from time to time -- these 3d scanner solutions and I've been dubious about pretty much all of them. Thanks for taking the time to share this -- love your videos man.

[@jarhead_jr]

I recently backed the Revopoint Pop 2 scanner....essentially the same as yours, but they've improved the resolution and hopefully the software. Having used Faro arms and 3D scanners in a professional engineering setting, I'm probably setting myself up for disappointment, but I need some relatively accurate models of subframe mounts on a car I need to modify for an alternative differential solution. A mid-tier option in the $1000-2000 range that could provide true 0.2mm accuracy with decent software I think would be a valuable tool for a lot of smaller custom work shops or garages or serious tinkerers..

[@noiwonttellyoumyname.4385]

The biggest thing holding POP back is the software. The hardware is actually pretty damned good. If they'd just get the bundle adjustment sorted out in the software, we'll really get some good results from it.

[@jarhead_jr]

@@noiwonttellyoumyname.4385 I agree. Now that I have it....I hate the software. Its so difficult to get a good scan. I'm considering switching to an Einstar just for the software improvement.

[@noiwonttellyoumyname.4385]

@@jarhead_jr Their software is absolute cancer. I'd hoped POP2 would be an improvement, but it absolutely hasn't been. I've been doing a ton of photogrammetry lately and getting decent results, but I'm just about at the point of building my own damn scanner, because I really want large objects, room-scale stuff, etc.

[@Fischhofa]

Searched a video like this for ever. Perfect, just perfect.

[@Tex777_]

This is why I love your channel, this is exactly the kind of info I was wanting to know but don't have the resources to access. However, I guess that means I'll stick to using an iPhone for scanning since that's what I've got!

[@anubis520]

I'm not in the market for a 3d scanner. I am not sure why I am watching this video but here I am. Since I watched it, it was a good video, well paced and gets good information across with good visuals. well done.

[@sparky1570784]

on the pop you dont have to start over, you just press the back button or the undo until your back where you left off before the messup.

[@LeeJolley]

Have you seen the Einstar now? It’s the scanner you wanted

[@Hafvfilmer]

I can recommend the handyscan black series if you got deep pockets, its 100 micron point distance is unbeatable

[@therealgaragegirls]

I use the Occipital Structure sensor, which mounts to my iPad. It was $700-ish for the sensor. (I already had an iPad.) It's perfectly within the Goldilocks zone you were alluding to.

[@guyblin]

7:37 - "I wish there was a middle ground" - there is, my friend. Just get yourself a used professional scanner from between 10-20 years ago. It wont cost you more than a couple of grand and will give you just as good resolution as the Einscan (although depending on the system you might have to take longer scanning and/or processing/editing). Oh and get yourself a better poly decimator - you can retain a lot of that detail whilst still making the mesh less heavy/dense. At the end of the day though you're better off just using the dense mesh to spline/surface over.

[@Ernescme]

There is a middle ground between cheap and expensive scanners - borrow, or rent an expensive one. Also there are companies that will do the scans for you for quite reasonable prices. So there are options to get good scans without spending a fortune. Also - do you really need a scanner for couple of scans per year or less?

[@jsquared1013]

"Also - do you really need a scanner for couple of scans per year or less?" I take it you haven't seen his (multiple) videos of spending 4 figures on tools to make a 3 figure part instead of buying a commercially available one for slightly more 😆

[@Erowens98]

Problem with renting tools is that doesn't give you much time to learn how to use them. Sure, you can get something done. But it usually takes a few days to really master a tool. Even longer when something heavily software dependent is involved. Nobody wants to rent the tool for longer than they need to just so they can figure it out before using it.

[@Tarex_]

In combination with software like Geomagic Design X that can turn a scanned mesh into CAD, the scanner makes even more sense, and with a good camera, photogrammetry can pick up much more detail than the LiDAR and intel and revopoint, only difference being the processing time since it needs a ton of resources when it comes to computing

[@777MAV]

Let's not mention how much that software costs :)))

[@Tarex_]

@@777MAV when paying 12k€$£ for the entry level scanner that isn't a toy.. XD .. it's the feature Fusion360 is trying to emulate and failing hard with the mesh conversion option, maybe they'll catch up in the upcoming year.. I was at Formnext 2021, was quoted 15-150,000€ for 3d scanners , was only able to roll my eyes, managed not to faint or run screaming lol.. I use my xiaomi phone for Photogrammetry and manual CADification lol

[@miketriesmotorsports6080]

I get the impression that most of this has to do with software. I was trying to use an Occipital Structure scanner (gen 1) a few years back to do interiors of houses for VR tours. The same scanner was more than capable of tracking details, objects, etc.... except when it wasn't (in bad software). Occipital are doing a great job of bringing this stuff to consumers. Cool video, Matt. Thanks for putting it together!

[@cncgeneral]

Reference dots can just be printed out on sticky back paper, they don't need to be super precise so long as they're the correct nominal size

[@landrecce]

Dude you have the best sense of humour! I crack up during every video! Also I learn a ton too! Thanks!

[@poprawa]

Does glittery hot glue work as reflective dot? You can remove it with IPA with ease and it is cheap

[@AdityaMehendale]

Excellent point. I was thinking of shapeoko-style stickers - these can give an absolute-scale reference too (mm, inches, whatever), besides functioning as fiducial markers.

[@cncgeneral]

It needs to be round and a specific diameter, the reflectiveness is less important

[@dylanyates6331]

What a kickass way to perhaps tease the new engine for the Honda

[@THEONLYNIKOMATH]

SUPER Excited to see this content. ive been wanting to do this ever since I heard about the lidar tech

[@CapitalCreators]

seems like the biggest and most simple improvements could done by changing scanning method. Anyone using the product has access to decent smooth floor space. some sort of jig with caster wheels that roles around the object. Motorizing and even programming the jig to move itself would be fairly straight forward.

[@edumaker-alexgibson]

#9 here. I run a 3D printing business and have occasional need for professional level scans. Have found the middle ground: just hire the pro gear! I rented a $50,000 Creaform Handyscan Black Elite, which is basically the same deal as the pro scanner you used but even higher spec, for a couple of days (over a weekend because the 3D community are lovely people). Came with laptop setup, dots, the works. Cost more than a consumer scanner, but it came out of the project budget. If you synchronised with a few people and had a little scan party the cost per item scanned can drop quickly...

[@brandonn0264]

You any good at 3d modeling? I have a great business model!

[@remog38]

Happy New Year Matt thank you for last year looking forward to this year

[@darwinskeeper421]

So only 8 people are interested in 3D scanners but 2,900 people liked this video because of your amazing personality.

[@nikovbn839]

Scanners and 3D printers will go along so nicely :)

[@treadless_co]

I'm looking into updating our 3D scanner at work. We are looking to improve upon our 20 um scanner. A human red blood cell is about 8 um in diameter. Working in the turbine industry. The 40 um accuracy of the best EinScan would still be 2x decrease. There are better options out there (creaform, GOM, etc).

[@jondo2010]

Years ago in university Formula SAE times, I spent a month of one summer painfully trying to model the mounting points and oil pan flange of our CBR600 engine. At first I started with a 3-axis CMM we had in a lab, which was a nightmare and was soon given up on. I ended up using a flatbed scanner for the flange and scaling with caliper measurements. Might have been a lot easier with 3D scanners.

[@mhrepoman]

I have a pretty inexpensive (paid 1500$) 3d scanner and I have found I get the best results if I use some powder and also target dots here and there, then I built a lazy Susan that's trying enough to hold something like a motorcycle engine as well as a tripod for the camera. I also use really good lighting so i don't get any shadows. Then I start the scan and turn on the lazy Susan and it slowly rotates

[@FiltyIncognito]

- Some 3D modeling programs have functions that can reduce the details of meshes selectively and using different algorithms to produce different kinds of results depending on what you're looking for. - It looks the stitched-together surfaces can sometimes create more problems than it's worth. Even if it's not pretty, a raw point-map would much more useful for details rather than the inferred surfaces created by the processors for the cheap scanners. - I'm not sure if it's supported, but using guide blocks would go a long way towards maintaining position. Basically it's just a cube with different images on each surface that the processor can use to assert camera position, and if you affix it to the target object, it'll give you a very reliable relative position between camera and target. Just stick it onto unimportant features. - Again, I'm not sure if it's supported but for non-LIDAR scanners you could also use colored lights shining from different angles to increase the contrast on harder-to-read surfaces, or use patterned lights like from those cheapish laser pointers with shaped apertures that create shapes you can project onto surfaces. - There's a bunch of good research on stitching together multiple photos to create some really good quality 3D models, which would be hella easier to manage. All you'd need is to take some pictures with a half decent camera and send the photo gallery through the processor, and if needed, just take more pictures and process it again. No need for careful real-time scanning and wasting all your time from minor mistakes or hardware/software deficiencies. That being said, I'm not sure just how good the quality is or how long until research turns into accessible products. Some of these types of research do release their source code or even the bare-bones programs they used, though, so if you look around you might luck out.

[@andrewbeck8559]

So I print minis for tabletop and boardgames and such. I have experimented with the phone scanning, but to very poor results. Would the expensive scanner work for tiny detailed miniatures? When I was watching it looked like the finer details were still smoothed over.

[@SuperfastMatt]

I don't know about tabletop minis. those details are super small.

[@yellowboxster06]

The most useful video I've watched in a long time.

[@jeremystark8065]

If you'd ever like to really get a quality scan of your parts in sub-mm accuracy and detail, look into a creaform scanner. The handyscan is an amazing device with detail that makes the einscan look like a toy.

[@GF-if4zt]

Photogrametry tipp. You can print out a paper with targets and use the distance betwen the targets to reference the scan. Did that in Metashape works quite good. ž

[@tolga1cool]

I got to use an Artec scanner at work and I was really happy with the thing. So much better then the consumer stuff. It's kinda sad that there really isn't a "mid range" option. You either have to buy the pro scanners or deal with the consumer stuff

[@fpjeepy05]

Can we get an update? Is the revopoint pop2 any better than the original pop?

[@duncanmartin2626]

If they were a bit cheaper, there might be a business model around hiring out the high quality scanners. A bit like people can hire expensive tools they only nee once a year, or expensive camera lenses or things like that.

[@stephenfoster2532]

This is already done.

[@bigfilsing]

@Romulus III Yeah just pop the BMW 1000 RR engine under your arm and walk into the local scan shop :-) I can just about lift one on a good day and maybe pivot 20 degrees then quickly put it down !!!

[@cncgeneral]

You can basically assume a 3d scanner is junk after someone who doesn't care about it has touched it

[@derekyoung4402]

I looked into this -- it's hilariously expensive. Like $3k/week. Line up all your buddies and do a group rent maybe but there will be something you forgot to scan. I ended up going the DIY photogrammetry route.

[@BenWilson24]

There is definitely a use case in aerospace. My friend gets sent all over scanning in old parts that no longer have drawings or models. It's also often more handy than CMM for complex 3D prints where programming the CMM could be a pain

[@Tugmun11]

Dude your channel is the bomb-diggity, tanks for sharin. . .

[@briost123]

WHERE DID THE WHEEL VIDEO GO?

[@briost123]

oh it's back

[@3ddiy]

I would also love that middle ground price point. If there was one I'm sure it would do well as there would be no competition in that price point.

[@jeffdughman9741]

you'er video and information helped me out a bunch, you did not waist your time, i learned a lot in a short time, big thanks!

[@777MAV]

Looking at anything except for Einscan - I had very similar results with first gen Xbox Kinect camera and app examples included in SDK to actually capture data. It's basically free. You can't get any precise measurements, but can get basic shape shape with good details.

[@robertbensch7748]

As someone who worked on GOM surface inspection scanning devices, I still need to distance myself from expecting too much from a 500€ gadget. I used 3d-systems sense scanner for lower resolution scans of people and items, and those were really good. I don´t know why they discontinued those, maybe because they interfered with selling the more advanced scanners in the professional line.

[@BleughBleugh]

Never even thought about using the FRONT face scanner for lIDAR - thankyou!, this video now has put me off my ambitions to buy an iphone for its lidar. i'll stick to photogrammetry right now