It would be even better if it were something to clip on the front of the POP! Imagine scanning a tiny figure or object, then printing it in another size!
I agree I recommended something like th Nyko Zoom that was made for the Xbox Kinect…
what about making a hanging fixture to suspend the part, then use the turntable, editing out the fixture after?
Thank you for your suggestion, we will consider to develop a scanner for tiny object!
1 Like
No…he was talking about an adapter for this one, not a new scanner
You can just turntable the small object. That’s the point of the turntable.
If you want a higher fidelity scan you would have to use a different sensor.
Any kind of clip would be pointless because you can’t rotate it freely once attached.
I think they were referring to this - Minimum scan volume 50Ă—50Ă—50 - and wanting to scan items like 24mm miniatures and such.
I agree an attachment for on this would be great but I don’t think the quality would be as good.
24mm in a 50mm SPACE is horrific how?
“24mm in a 50mm SPACE is horrific how?” - I do not understand what you mean. They have the smallest scanning size as 50mm for the scanner itself. So if you want to scan something smaller it won’t do a good job or may not scan at all. I won’t know till I get mine and test it out.
You are scanning an object that’s about 50% of the linear dimension of the scan volume. Why is this a problem?
You don’t seem to understand that the scan volume is irrelevant and it just means there’s no stitching needed.
Look at the points RESOLUTION and accuracy.
https://en.openscan.eu/openscan-mini This is an opensource project you can 3D print and assemble to do highly accurate scans within 10cm cube or less.
2 Likes
Isn’t the resolution too low to handle detail at that small of a scale though?
The way revopoint pop is designed, there is an optimal size for items. If they get too small, resolution relative to scan distance and focus will be too coarse for useful scanning. The scanner isnt made for scanning false teeth, but larger size items. If you wanted to scan a car, using a dental scanner would also be a much time consuming project. And stitching surfaces would eat a lot of computing capacity. You dont need to have a full size vehicle with 1/1000 mm resolution.
1 Like
That’s definitely the main issue.The 0.3mm accuracy is great if you’re scanning large objects, but when you dip much below 50mm cubed, that gets to be rather substantial before too long. A 50mm cube on this could be anywhere from 50.3mm to 49.7mm. And not guaranteed to be consistently wrong in the same direction. The result is being off by about ± .6%. Which isn’t necessarily that bad, but by the time you get to 25mm cubed, that jumps to ±1.2%. In each direction, which leads to there being a potential for that error in all directions which winds up being nearly 2% error margin if I’ve done the math on that correctly. For most applications, a smaller item is going to tolerate that even less well than a larger item will.
I was a bit surprised that they were listed the dental scanner as I’m not sure how you’d get it in the mouth, unless you had the teeth out already.
Personally, I’m going to use photogrammetry until I can afford a device that can handle such small items. The turntable combined with a time lapse camera would likely make sure work of it and if you’re using a macro lens, you could scan things that are extremely small with the only limit being your ability to physically manipulate the items. .
As I mentioned, you should check this out. It’s photogrammetry, but it is very accurate, and inexpensive to build.