Some of my scans

What have you scanned recently?
User avatar
Micr0
Posts: 471
Joined: 15 Nov 2016, 15:20
Location: New York City

Re: Some of my scans

Post by Micr0 »

OBNRacerMan wrote: 05 Nov 2020, 19:03
OBNRacerMan wrote: 05 Nov 2020, 18:44 In the program itself (during calibration) there are recommendations for installing the lens with the desired focal length for a given scanning area.
For the smallest 3rd zone, 16mm lenses are best. For the 4th zone (it is not included in the kit, but you can print the actual one), 25mm lenses are recommended. And 12mm is probably for the 1st and 2nd zones (large and medium) - I have never used them yet.

The size of my zone number 3 is 94.463mm, the size of my homemade printed zone number 4 is 58.744mm

Here, if anyone is interested, a link to several small fields for self-production (in CorelDraw v.13 format)
RV_04_16.jpg
I also tried scanning with binning BIN4 - the resolution of the cameras is reduced by 4 times, but recalibration for this mode (in contrast to the software crop) is not required.
RV_07_05.jpg

Scans:
2020.11.04_fork_doshirak_01.jpg2020.11.04_fork_doshirak_02.jpg
drill_6.0_compare_01.jpgdrill_6.0_compare_02.jpg

The surface on the full resolution scan of the drill bit seems exceptional rough. Why do you suppose that is?
µ
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

I think there are two main reasons: the drill has a black coating, it also has particles from its work.
If it were matted with a lightening compound, the result would be a little better.

In general, I was asked to scan the drill in order to evaluate how the use of binning would round off sharp edges.
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

Now, for the sake of interest, I rescanned the old object (which I had already laid out) - the frame of the gearshift lever - but with a new system.
1
1
2
2
3
3
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

Conducted a small test comparison of two scanning programs - HP3DScan and Rangevision DIY.
The test object was the lid of a coffee can - black, mostly glossy, but with some matte elements.
The same equipment was used - Daheng MER630U3-L cameras with 16mm ZLKC lenses and a time-tested Byintek projector with a resolution of 1280 * 720px

First, the old HP3DScan went into battle. He had a software limitation - he can only use one Daheng camera.
The shutter speed had to be set to 1/8 "(and for the camera (it has access to brightness and contrast correction in this program) the maximum brightness and minimum contrast were set.
This is what the object looked like in the HP frame:
This is what the object looked like in the HP frame
This is what the object looked like in the HP frame
And this is how a single scan element looked like in HP:
And this is how a single scan element looked like in HP:
And this is how a single scan element looked like in HP:
A total of 8 scans were made, after which the model was combined by means of this program and exported to STL.

After that, the RV DIY program worked from the same position.
It has no camera settings other than exposure. Therefore, the first shutter speed was set to 33 (1/30 ") and the second shutter speed to 133 (1/8") in order to avoid overexposure from glare that these cameras are exposed to in this program.
This is how the object looked in the RV frame:
And this is how a single scan element turned out in it:
And this is how a single scan element turned out in it:
And this is how a single scan element turned out in it:
This is how the object looked in the RV frame:
This is how the object looked in the RV frame:
Here I also made 8 scans, and then added the STL obtained at HP for comparison:
Compare scans - 1
Compare scans - 1
Compare scans - 2
Compare scans - 2
Compare scans - 3
Compare scans - 3
Left - RV, right - HP

In my opinion, the result was quite good in both cases. But RV better conveyed both the angles between the elements (between the "sun rays" and the base) and the very shape of the rays.
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
User avatar
Micr0
Posts: 471
Joined: 15 Nov 2016, 15:20
Location: New York City

Re: Some of my scans

Post by Micr0 »

OBNRacerMan wrote: 30 Nov 2020, 22:08 Conducted a small test comparison of two scanning programs - HP3DScan and Rangevision DIY.
The test object was the lid of a coffee can - black, mostly glossy, but with some matte elements.
The same equipment was used - Daheng MER630U3-L cameras with 16mm ZLKC lenses and a time-tested Byintek projector with a resolution of 1280 * 720px

First, the old HP3DScan went into battle. He had a software limitation - he can only use one Daheng camera.
The shutter speed had to be set to 1/8 "(and for the camera (it has access to brightness and contrast correction in this program) the maximum brightness and minimum contrast were set.
This is what the object looked like in the HP frame:
hp3dscan_16_01.jpg
And this is how a single scan element looked like in HP:
hp3dscan_16_02.jpg
A total of 8 scans were made, after which the model was combined by means of this program and exported to STL.

After that, the RV DIY program worked from the same position.
It has no camera settings other than exposure. Therefore, the first shutter speed was set to 33 (1/30 ") and the second shutter speed to 133 (1/8") in order to avoid overexposure from glare that these cameras are exposed to in this program.
This is how the object looked in the RV frame:
hp3dscan_16_06.jpg
And this is how a single scan element turned out in it:
hp3dscan_16_05.jpg
Here I also made 8 scans, and then added the STL obtained at HP for comparison:
hp3dscan_16_07.jpghp3dscan_16_08.jpghp3dscan_16_09.jpg
Left - RV, right - HP

In my opinion, the result was quite good in both cases. But RV better conveyed both the angles between the elements (between the "sun rays" and the base) and the very shape of the rays.
It looks like the RV error rejection/correction is more refined.

Black and reflective is tough for any SL type scanner. I have never had good luck scanning them with David and almost always spray the surface for that reason.
µ
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

Micr0 wrote: 30 Nov 2020, 22:58 Black and reflective is tough for any SL type scanner. I have never had good luck scanning them with David and almost always spray the surface for that reason.
My previous Mindvision cameras were the best solution for HP3DScan - thanks to the huge number of settings, they scanned dark and black objects quite easily. Not to mention, these cameras can work together at HP. And if I had not switched to another software, I would have continued to enjoy life with them :D
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
User avatar
Micr0
Posts: 471
Joined: 15 Nov 2016, 15:20
Location: New York City

Re: Some of my scans

Post by Micr0 »

OBNRacerMan wrote: 30 Nov 2020, 23:08
Micr0 wrote: 30 Nov 2020, 22:58 Black and reflective is tough for any SL type scanner. I have never had good luck scanning them with David and almost always spray the surface for that reason.
My previous Mindvision cameras were the best solution for HP3DScan - thanks to the huge number of settings, they scanned dark and black objects quite easily. Not to mention, these cameras can work together at HP. And if I had not switched to another software, I would have continued to enjoy life with them :D

What settings did you change to get those cameras to scan dark items effectively? I can tweak some setting in the IS cameras, but I haven't really experimented with trying to make them work. I just sprayed the subject, which I'd like to not have to do with some things.
µ
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

Micr0 wrote: 01 Dec 2020, 00:18 What settings did you change to get those cameras to scan dark items effectively? I can tweak some setting in the IS cameras, but I haven't really experimented with trying to make them work. I just sprayed the subject, which I'd like to not have to do with some things.
It all depends on the available parameters in the settings.
For the Mindvision SUA630 cameras, I used a decrease in the gamma value. Their shutter speed was always 1/60 ", the rest was controlled by the gain that works perfectly in them.
The gamma value decreased from 1.0 (default) to 0.75, sometimes 0.5 and even to 0.35:
Mindvision SUA630 parameters
Mindvision SUA630 parameters
The basic settings of Daheng MER630 cameras through their original control program are very poor, there is nothing but setting the shutter speed (you can also adjust the gain within small limits (but from HP3DScan this parameter cannot be smoothly adjusted - it is either off or maximum)). But in HP3Dscan for these cameras, brightness and contrast settings are available (unfortunately, the gamma parameter is inactive, and even if you trick it and enable it, it still does not work in HP). I scanned with these settings:
Daheng MER630 parameters
Daheng MER630 parameters
P.S. In the RV software for cameras there are no settings other than exposure and resolution switching between full and BIN4
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
mr_cg
Posts: 15
Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 20:17

Re: Some of my scans

Post by mr_cg »

The Rangevision DIY looks very interesting. Is it possible to use the HP S3 Kameras, Acer K132 projector and HP rail setup with Rangevision DIY software?
In this case i would like to try Rangevision software.
User avatar
OBNRacerMan
Posts: 235
Joined: 12 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Obninsk, Russia

Re: Some of my scans

Post by OBNRacerMan »

mr_cg wrote: 04 Jan 2021, 20:51 The Rangevision DIY looks very interesting. Is it possible to use the HP S3 Kameras, Acer K132 projector and HP rail setup with Rangevision DIY software?
In this case i would like to try Rangevision software.
The projector can be anything, the mounting system of the whole structure can also be any ... but cameras (for DIY version) should only be either UCMOS3100KPA (USB2.0 3.1Mp, 1/2", 8fps) or Daheng Mercury MER-630- 60U3M-L (USB3.0, 6.3Mp, 1/1.8", 60fps, monochrome). I have the last of this short list. And there must be two cameras (the option with one camera is not supported).
P.S. IDS cameras are also supported.
Soft: RangeVision DIY, Calibration panel/Rotary tables - RangeVision, Prj: Byintek UFO R9, Cam: Daheng Mercury MER-630-60U3M-L (USB3.0, monochrome) x2, Obj: ZLKC HM1628MP10 (F2.8, 10Mp, 16mm) x2 & Azure 3518M3M (F1.8, 3Mp, 35mm).
Post Reply