Facing the RANGE2 off against it's predecessor and the MIRACO!


So I thought I’d run a few data tests to compare the new kid on the block against its predecessor, and also against the Far mode on the MIRACO.

I used a driftwood sculpture that is fairly intricate, has some nice detailing and fairly subtle colouring. It’s about 1m/3.3ft tall.

[N.B. all of these models were generated using Continuous Mode - you may well be able to wring more detail out of Single Shot… or not. I’ve yet to try that with either RANGE systems]


This is something the RANGE2 owns the RANGE on with a boot-up time around 8.5secs, as opposed to the RANGE’s comparatively sluggish 21.5secs (both powering up from the Revo battery grip).

The MIRACO is slower still at around 25 seconds, but bear in mind you’re booting up an entire OS, not just a piece of hardware.


The RANGE2 ate this up, getting full coverage in around 1600 frames with amazing tracking, including the base from a couple of angles. The RANGE also did great tracking, but topped out the 4000 frame limit on a phone before I managed to get the base. The MIRACO didn’t have the frame limitations of the RANGE, but took 5000 frames which resulted in a massive project file (around 7GB on the PC by the time poly models had been generated) thanks to those hefty high resolution images.

So basically what you’d expect from the FOV of each system. None of them exhibited any particular problems tracking, even over the smoother areas of the sculpture, but with the increased FOV of the RANGE2 you can afford to move a little faster and be a little less exact.

On the down side that FOV means the RANGE2 can tend to capture other items around if you’re not careful, so for once messing with the DOF sliders can help reign this in. It’s not a major deal though, unless you’re trying to turntable scan in a cramped space (which I was doing!).


This is pretty much how you’d expect it to go with the FOV inversely proportionate to the resolution/detail level. That said the difference between geometry from the RANGE2 AND RANGE isn’t so great as you might expect from the increased FOV.


[N.B. All models were scanned at the close end of the Excellent range, which will in some cases create problems with colour resolution, as it’s more likely to bloom out some light areas and create problematic shadows here and there, but I’m trying to replicate a user doing their best to resolve as good Geometry as possible. The fact is if Textures are really what you’re after, it’s worth backing off a little to the middle/edge of the Good range instead to create a little more diffuse light.]

I haven’t included a map for the RANGE as it doesn’t have the internal illuminator, but it’s on par with the RANGE2 if you can rig up some diffuse lighting. So it’s just a head-to-head with the MIRACO.

The resolution of the RANGE2’s camera can’t come close to the MIRACO’s, but in terms of faithful colour reproduction, the RANGE2 actually does a superb job for just 4 LEDs. Whilst it might need a tiny tweak in post, it’s nothing compared to the work you need to do with the MIRACO texture.

Whilst there’s no denying the outright resolution of the MIRACO textures, there’s some weird, excessive Contrast being applied somewhere in the mix. Even after some pretty brutal Photoshop work on the levels/contrast etc, there’s still way too much contrast going on.

I’ve sent these results to Revopoint so that hopefully there’s some sort of firmware tweak that can be applied to correct this, because I think that’s the only issue with the MIRACO colour resolution. But the contrast is just extreme. Do bear in mind though what I said about stepping back a little from your subject to create a bit more diffusion for the light. I also want to do some more tests with single shot to see if there aren’t some other workarounds for this issue.


If you don’t have a wide-field, large FOV system, then look no further than the RANGE2. It has great tracking, good geometry and a surprisingly colour-faithful camera/texture.

Whilst I didn’t encounter any issues tracking with any of the systems, when I was warming up with the RANGE2 I did try scanning it over a vintage-style leather sofa, moving stupidly quickly and really trying to throw it off, and it did an amazing job until I strayed to the end nearest some windows.

Whilst chunkier than its predecessor, it’s less wide so feels more wieldy, especially as they’ve kept the weight around the same.

If you have an original RANGE however, don’t be too quick to upgrade unless you really need that colour map and struggle maintaining tracking with the RANGE. Personally I’ve never had an issue with the RANGE’s tracking, but I have a lot of experience with hand held scanners. If you’re a beginner though, I have no doubt that the RANGE2’s IMU and larger FOV will help you track better.

But if you’re comfortable with the RANGE, it will resolve more detail for you, and actually, the RANGE2 is SO easy to move around fast, that there’s every possibility that you could start making the points a little too sparse in places! I can see in the geometry a couple of areas where the RANGE2 seems to lose some additional definition over the RANGE - it’s a tiny amount, but just watch you don’t get too carried away!

I guess my point is: don’t succumb to FOMO, or feel aggrieved that you’ve only just got the original RANGE just before the new one was released. I hadn’t used the RANGE for a while and these tests made me remember just how capable it is, so if textures aren’t of much use to you, I’d say persevere with it and don’t feel a need to auto-upgrade.

But if you don’t have a large FOV scanner and constantly scan big stuff, look no further. Especially if it’s stuff like car panels and large, feature-poor surfaces.

Just a word before closing about the MIRACO in Far mode - I still love my MIRACO for its sheer convenience and versatility, but it just gets edged out in every way except in sheer detail by these more dedicated systems… as you’d expect.

But if you have a MIRACO and don’t regularly face huge items, then it’s perfectly capable of tackling those bigger-than-usual jobs. Just be prepared to tweak the map in post a fair bit, and be prepared for some extra contrast in the texture.

The contenders! (The Range is attached to my pre-Miraco dual rig with a POP3)


Thank you very much for this detailed comparison :star_struck:!

Having the MIRACO and the RANGE, I was thinking of selling my RANGE to possibly acquire the RANGE 2. Now, I’m hesitating. Additionally, I understand that the MINI 2 won’t be long in coming, and it’s actually the one I would need to complete my project (human scanning to customize a variety of mini figurines).

Well it’s not for me to dissuade you of buying a new toy :wink:

But I reckon with the Range and the Miraco you probably have the bases covered, unless you plan on doing a load of large objects and body scanning. The tracking and overall ease of use is definitely increased on the Range2 - it’s a lot easier to do effective body scans without surface errors - but you do compromise a little on detail… plus of course it’s course it’s money you could put towards the possible MINI2 release.

Of course in an ideal world, if money were no object, you’d get BOTH! :wink:

Both? You should buy all of the scanners :wink:

In all seriousness, that is a good write up and mirrors my experience. I love Range 2 and Miraco and if money was no object then I’d buy both along with Mini to cover all the bases.
I’m lucky in that I do have all of Revopoint’s scanners and so can pick the right tool for the job. If I could have only 1 though; it would be Miraco, with Range 2 as a close second.

1 Like

Yeah Im fortunate in having the same luxury, and if I had to choose one, it would def be my Miraco… although if I had a load of people to scan quickly it would be a tough call - the Range eats that stuff up! Im also v attached to my MINI… looking forward to the new one!

Just want to chime in that I totally agree with the observation of hyper contrasty RGB images from the Miraco. I would like to see that go away.

Such a good read, thank you!

You can’t make it go away unless you use a proper lighting with a good CRI95 at least , or if appreciate software can control it for a full quality, I have that sensor in my older phone and the picture quality is amazing at full size , sadly this kind of sensors are not working great when the resolution is reduced creating the fake HDR effect on the edges especially the red channel is very contrasting, but good proper lighting can make a wonder .