Love the Build It Yourself V10 Continental series, didn’t expect to see the Trackit make a cameo in their latest. Car sounds pretty good too!
Watching them, I started thinking about one really powerful use case with Trackit for designing. With the trackit able to identify the scanners position without actually scanning the object, you could scan only the interfaces and not have to bother with the bits that connect them and still get a useful reference. That would make these reference models so lightweight and much easier to manage in post!
The Tracker only recognizes the markers on the Cage and thanks to it the actual distance between the scanner and the tracker . It do not capture the object surface data as it is specific for tracking the cage itself only for stabilization.
The Depth Cameras doing the full job by recognizing the actual scanning distance from the scanned object by recognizing the laser lines on the surface in 3D space.
Your idea is cool but more for a new 3D scanner with different technology than Structured Light .
Why would any of those details prohibit someone from scanning only the inteface points they need with the trackit and omitting the connecting geometry? Thinking about it, thats exactly what Ash did in this video but for the actual interfacing geometry
The video just showing the distance of 2 points , not rocket science any 3D scanner do that.
Just fuse your scan at a very low point distance after , you will get a very low data model for what you need, or better decimate it after meshing to keep just the main points with preserves details where it needs to be for easier reconstruction and handle .
We are talking past each other. Obviously any scanner worth being called a scanner can figure 2 points in the same capture area. The magic is having 2 separate capture areas with no global marker system to link them. Thats where the trackit can really shine. Ive had to place geometry in a scene to link different areas and had to scan and process all this extraneous data to extract a subset of the data I really wanted to capture. I think we can all agree that the trackit will be a revolution for the prosumer grade scanners and thats all that needs to be said.
I understand you very well but this will not happen.
This scanning technology used here relays on global markers and can’t scan without it to keep the tracking of the object in space , it is also only laser that do not works without global markers or markers since it do not track any objects features.
#1 it is a finished product in production and not DIY so as I said early a nice idea for a next scanner .
#2 you can’t build yourself anything unless you have access to the software and hardware and that is also very limited due to trade mark secret.
Keep the ideas flowing , the best you can do in this case.
You definitely do not understand what I’m saying as the scanner can 100% perform the task I outlined already, no DIY effort needed. Ash was able to scan the ends of the calibration rod without scanning the entire length and get incredibly accurate distance measurements between the separated point clouds. That is not possible with any other scanning technology that I know of without first establishing a global marker system. The fact the trackit does so without a GMS is awesome and allows the user to pick off only the data they truly need with minimal effort. That is literally all I was trying to say.
What was posted to highlight the usefulness to the trackit system has become a point of contention for no reason. I think this conversation has run its course, we are not communicating effectively and I do not see a path to productive communication on this topic.
Trackit use Global Marker System , it is already preprogrammed with the Cage the scanner is in . It can’t scan anything without GMS or markers as it tracking it in real time and nothing else.
Let me step in here with an example of what I believe Phantom is trying to say. Think of something like you want to put a turbocharger system on a car but need to build a custom exhaust manifold to connect the engine to the turbo. One could position the turbo where they want it and then scan the area where the turbo is along with the engines cylinder head and not have to worry about losing tracking cause there would be an empty space where the exhaust manifold needs to be built. You could then in cad model the manifold how you want to fit the space. So what is being done is the ability to scan the turbo area and engine without worrying about trying to fill the empty void between with objects and markers like you would have to do with other scan systems. Granted the track it would have to be able to see the cage of the scanner during this process but it could be done. So the ability to scan two objects distant from each other with empty space in-between but being able to have their locations locked in accurately is what is the point I think. Phantom isn’t dismissing the marker system of track it but rather the marker system for the objects. Hopefully that clears things up between you two. You are both right, just on different pages it seems. At least that is how I am reading this.
You captured exactly what I was saying. Great example by the way. The trackit’s ability to capture data divorced from a marker constellation is a real game changer for creating lightweight, detailed and useful models for engineering.
Yes that make sense , thanks for the clarification.
I use this technique to scan separate objects yet locking them together in the same space preserving the space between them, using Feature Mode and Full Field where markers are not required.
This can be used in much better situations where the features are lacking using Trackit for this matter.
