Close



Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 99
  1. #21
    Technologist
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Chorley, UK
    Posts
    133
    Add 24c on Facebook
    Yes, that's a nice scan, nicely focussed detail, so well done. (y)
    Did you mesh it from the point cloud .asc files or use the auto align function in the software?
    I found the optical distance from scanner to surface is around 430mm to get a clean focus on the black & white unphase lines, and I think it helps if you don't deviate too much from the previous scan.
    I made a mistake on my first free scans by having the scanner too far away from the object, and I'm sure it decreased the surface resolution, and I noticed surface artefacts too. Anybody else have a recommended distance?
    57 scans seems a lot, as 8 is for the typical turntable scan, but moving the camera higher and lower is more beneficial to get easier alignment, than doing the equivalent of one planar rotation, then flipping the object. It definitely seems to work better moving the scanner around.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugues View Post
    Nice scan. Congrats.

    You don't need to leave the scanner in the calibrated position. Myself i free scan for the past few weeks and calibrated only once.
    I know , i didn't have much space on the table and i was too lazy to take it apart and connect it again...

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by 24c View Post
    Yes, that's a nice scan, nicely focussed detail, so well done. (y)
    Did you mesh it from the point cloud .asc files or use the auto align function in the software?
    I found the optical distance from scanner to surface is around 430mm to get a clean focus on the black & white unphase lines, and I think it helps if you don't deviate too much from the previous scan.
    I made a mistake on my first free scans by having the scanner too far away from the object, and I'm sure it decreased the surface resolution, and I noticed surface artefacts too. Anybody else have a recommended distance?
    57 scans seems a lot, as 8 is for the typical turntable scan, but moving the camera higher and lower is more beneficial to get easier alignment, than doing the equivalent of one planar rotation, then flipping the object. It definitely seems to work better moving the scanner around.
    Thank you i guess i got luck on that !
    I did auto align that worked like a charm , but i also saved the .asc files in case i needed them.
    How can i do the alignment manually with .asc files ??? is there a tutorial somewhere ???
    Since i didn't move from the calibration position although i was in free mode my distance was close to 430-500mm and i never moved the scanner , i was only repositioning the model.
    I also thought that 57 scans were a lot but there were many hidden angles and i was too lazy to setup the scanner on the tripod ...
    The model was 99% scanned and only about 1% of the surface was left to auto water tight. Especially the area inside the mouth was very hard !
    I had around 10-12 scans to get the inside....

  4. #24
    Engineer-in-Training Hugues's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by airguy View Post
    ...
    How can i do the alignment manually with .asc files ??? is there a tutorial somewhere ???
    e....
    The .asc files are already aligned, but they contain the XYZ coordinates of the point cloud. To convert that to an .stl file, follow this procedure:
    http://3dprintboard.com/showthread.p...6417#post66417

    Could be helpful if you are not happy sometimes with the way Einscan does the meshing.

  5. #25
    Thank you , i will try it for fun anyway !

  6. #26

    350z

    Ok. Having seen some of the magnificant scans posted here mine seems somewhat primative. Still. Here goes. This was done using the turntable, hi-res. Model was sprayed with white primer. I scanned it with the tires down, then a scan on the right and left side. .. Next will be trying free scanning.

    comparephotos.jpg

  7. #27
    hi,

    i am the new member of Ein-scan.
    Quality wise hats off.
    Still struggling with accuracy.
    not achieving what was expected less than 0.1mm.
    Here are some images of scan, i did.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    • File Type: jpg 1.jpg (97.1 KB, 45 views)
    • File Type: jpg 2.jpg (17.7 KB, 49 views)
    • File Type: jpg 3.jpg (73.2 KB, 50 views)
    • File Type: jpg 4.jpg (25.4 KB, 48 views)
    • File Type: jpg 5.jpg (82.8 KB, 35 views)

  8. #28
    hi,

    i am the new member of Ein-scan.
    Quality wise hats off.
    Still struggling with accuracy.
    not achieving what was expected less than 0.1mm.
    Here are some images of scan, i did.6.jpg7.jpg8.jpg9.jpg11.jpg

  9. #29
    Hi manish:

    The accuracy of one-shot scan is 0.1mm, not the whole scan .

    Eric

  10. #30
    Technologist
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Chorley, UK
    Posts
    133
    Add 24c on Facebook
    The accuracy of one-shot scan is 0.1mm, not the whole scan
    Now that is very interesting, and explains why i get more artefacts, blurring of detail using the turntable in more than one pass or shot!
    Excellent feedback, and it backs up the observations of others re turntable scans.

    Mike

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •