Leave your feedback & suggestions on the Revo Scan 5

Fair, but typically I am using my Miraco or Mini to capture rather large datasets from clay sculpted detail for prosthetic makeups and or specialty costumes before they are molded. I am often working with scans that result in mesh densities north of 10-15 million triangles, so there are some cases where hole detection can take as much as 5 minutes on my workstation which coincidently is no slouch (Threadripper 3955WX, 64Gb ram, PCIe Gen3 NVMe SSD drive) so I don’t believe the bottleneck resides on the system. For context I use Materialise Magics to process 3D prints on the same machine, loading in the same geometry I can get the hole filling done in fraction of the time. Granted its an unfair comparison as each program has their respective markets and not everyone can enjoy access to a high level application like magics, myself included outside of work. The same can be said comparing the Miraco to something like the Artec Eva or Leo, completely different ends of the market spectrum. But I don’t think there is any harm trying to suggest features found in enterprise software/hardware. Just like how the 3d printing segment was very exclusive and the consumer segment was almost non existent, now the consumer level 3d printers are giving the enterprise level equivalents a run for their money. I think this will happen too with 3D scanners, in fact, already is happening with devices like the Miraco. So its only natural that its userbase will want to encourage Revopoint not to rest on its laurels and strive to be on the forefront, because just like the consumer 3D printer market, they’re a lot of contenders vying for that top spot.

So do I , it is always great to leave feedback and suggestions regarding your needs .

How you getting 15 millions poly meshes in Revo Scan ? It usually uses only fraction of the point cloud around 10% , the software have limitation to protect it from run out of RAM memory so even if you used mini to fuse it at 0.02mm the meshing will be greater than 0.175 resulting the mesh to be around 2 to 5 millions poly only .

It is possible that the software scales depending on system specs, a revopoint rep would have to confirm. But even if its a fixed mesh density, like you say, total tri counts scale with the size of subject. Ive scanned plenty of life cast busts that include a full head down to the shoulders at maximum resolution and those end up north of 15 million. Today i was scanning hand sculptures for a creature suit, the resulting mesh for just the hands using the Miraco’s near mode was around10 million.
I have noticed if i try to mesh on the miraco, i am limted more so than on the desktop app. I ran into this issue using the mobile version as well. So my standard procedure is using the scanner for aquisition only, all processing is done on my workstation. I’ll see what my settings show up as when i get into work tomorrow. I fave a few more scans i have to do anyways.

The scale do not depends of your system , it is set to the scale of scanned object . How bigger the scan how lower the available specs for meshing . It is set to support 16GB of RAM at max plus/minus, after we tested the limitless access to RAM some mini scan becomes around 35 millions of poly and crashed many lower RAM systems while processing because of the lack of the RAM . It would be great to have it depends of your system specs but sadly it is not .

The meshing on workstation or MIRACO itself only use fraction of the provided data and meshing at 0.174 mm max and not lower . How bigger the scan how lower the quality after meshing .

You want to get better meshing results ? Use Cloud Compare after you processed the point cloud as that is most important data

But it can get some time consuming if you process it at higher level .

Also if you want better quality with MINI just clean up the scan in raw mode , it will increase the capacity and fusing quality .

BTW we are in process of testing new software that allows better fusion settings for MINI series , so simply you can capture single face pores with it . Especially if you scanning casts it is gonna be amazing and so much improved.

1 Like

:astonished: stunning results and such software much wanted. call me in for any beta testing :grin:

does these results exceed what is achievable with cloudcompare?

what would be the settings/workflow in cloudcompare to get such results right now? more than octree depth 12 or even other settings needed?

best regards

1 Like

I think it is very much acceptable , but Cloud compare can do it even better after the new fusing for Mini series are available in RS5.

There are not special settings for CC as long you clean well the scan before and after fusing , then export the point cloud to CC , it should deliver 80% more data from that fusing ( advanced mode )
Usually at 12 or even less .

1 Like

Wouldn’t it make sense to add an “Export to CC” button to RevoScan?

2 Likes

Hi!
you have to at least fuse the cloud in revoscan (= getting ply) to process it further in cloud compare,right?

so exporting to CC is as simple as saving as ply and opening it in CC.

Implementing the export function wouldn’t be much of time saver. or do you habe more in mind for such export function?:thinking:

I don’t know how much revo engineers would take to implement such “export to CC”, but IMHO it would be a luxury, probably not worth the time and effort they could use for other stuff on their list.

best regards

1 Like

I’d settle for batch export. Right now you can only do it from the batch fusion pop-up window after batch is complete.

2 Likes

Oh it would ! I would love that … the way CC doing registration ( merge ) RS5 is still half way behind .

2 Likes

Ditto! I have a Mini2, but I mostly do scans of very large things that I have to scan in segments. Processing and merging takes a considerable amount of my time.

Yes , but if you have 10 or more scans ? Automatic export would be great .

The MINI 2 improvement is to capture very fine details in your processed scans , so rather for a very fine scans .

1 Like

Definitely… I prefer manual edit , can’t trust the automatic batch fusion . So batch export would be great at least if we can’t have export to CC function :pensive:

1 Like

thats true ! :slight_smile:

1 Like

**Revo Scan version: RevoScan_V5.0. 5.4.74.220
**System : Windows 10, Ryzen 3960X 24 core 128GB Ram
**Scanner: Mini
**Your feedback & suggestion: Ability to manually move a scan into a rough alignment position. Sometimes scans from different sessions need to be rotated or moved so they are in closer alignment for feature tracking or marker alignment to work better. Also a undo in case the preview alignment is inaccurate.

1 Like

My observation is that the alignment function loves to think two halves of an object are actually reflected across a perpendicular axis. I have many examples of two scans being nearly aligned only to have the preview flip them around and do something similar to your screenshot. It’s weird because nothing in the middle ever seems to line up but that reflected symmetry is beautiful on the far ends. :slight_smile:

I don’t know the math involved, but it almost seems like there should be an option to select an axis for symmetry.

1 Like

Another tool that might be useful, at least in some cases, would be the ability to mirror a scan and then merge it. If the scanned object is already symmetrical why spend time scanning both sides. Of course some clean up would probably need to be done on the seam.