Marker scanning thoughts

Bit harder than expected. I think the gloss white reflecting the IR from the sun/daylight upset the scanner so just tried it at night and the cameras seem to track better but god you need a lot of dots!

Most of the scans are failing, they seem to ‘run away’ and repeat the pattern too easily.
A lot harder scanning this without the tripod.

On Creaform scanners we were told to scan the dots before getting data, that way the scanner knew what to expect and wasn’t always searching for new dots - that may be a function in a later version of the software ?

Software doesn’t want to do multiple scans either which is a bit annoying.
Oh and I’m out of dots now :joy:


How would you go about doing that in this situation?

Oh, and the picture shows, to me, too many similar patterns on the straighter portions. Perhaps if you added a few markers somewhat close to some existing markers to break up the similarities, then you’d get longer stretches of decent scan data.

Hi @JonHimself

Yes, the marker mode will be more challenging, but it is good to scan the objects with simple geometric features. I think you can scan very well after more practice.

Here is a tutorial post for your reference: [Tutorials] How to scan objects with Markers?

Btw, I noticed that you had shared several showcases posts in the showcase category. We will send you 2000pcs markers as a gift. Sincerely hope that you can keep active in this category and share more showcases.

Please send me a PM with you shipping information, thank you.

Best Regards

1 Like

Hi Jeff - it’s done in the software. It recognises the dots only but does not activate the scanning so you can grab the world positioning data 1st. The current software does this when tracking the dots anyways - you just switch off anything that isn’t a circle of 6mm diameter. Its useful as it knows where the dots will be ahead of time.

Yep the patterns are not great (running out of dots), to be honest I fell back on my creaform training where its unlikely to get a dot exactly 0.3mm distance from two others, but the more random the better for sure. To be fair this is a really hard task for a scanner, lots of reflections and edges.

However, I spent a lot of hours on this last night and in my opinion you need to cut down on external IR sources (ie sunlight) and play with the exposure/gain settings. Once you get that right the scanner has no probs tracking 95% of the time. Make multiple saves and then sew the object together.
The other thing is ignore the “too-far” warning :grin:
By moving right back the field of view allows more dots to be seen, and as you can see the scan is still very good.

This has obvs been compressed for sketchfab and I have increased the shading so you can see the imperfections (not that there are many!). That said if I scanned this with our inspection grade kit, I’d end up with about 10milion triangles which is completely un-usable anyway. This has been decimated to about 200,000 triangles

Cassie, that is very kind. I have a whole racing car to do so that will help a lot !
Customer service was one of the reasons I bought this scanner but the performance has exceeded expectations. I’m happy to share my experiences with it.

I’ve been reading this with interest. It’s impressive what you have achieved with the little POP scanner, it shows what could be possible with a bit more development of the software. I also use Creaform & GOM scanning equipment for measuring car body shells and components. For the best accuracy on large parts we perform photogrammetry to create a reference file of markers.
If a similar process could be incorporated within the POP Handyscan software it could make scanning larger objects more successful. Should be possible to create the photogrammetry using a phone or normal digital camera, just need the POP software to identify and reference the markers which are saved to a text file. This text file of marker positions could then be used to create a more accurate reference for the POP scanner.
I have only just started using my POP and so far quite impressed considering my experience with metrology spec scanning. Let’s hope they keep developing the software ware​:nose::crossed_fingers::crossed_fingers:

I’ve not used GOM products, i was really interested in their stomachic pattern deformation analysis as I work a fair bit in structures. When I had creaform kit they always suggested the dots were scanned first (there is a setting with scan dots only) - I scanned an entire 30ft boat once (a lot of dots :rofl:) and we could never get the mesh to align until we did it this way.

I agree if the software knew the position of the dots - you could positively impact stop the tolerance drift, but tbh I am using the POP for something probably way beyond what it really is intended for volume wise so I am not complaining at all.

Yes overall, I am very impressed with the POP and I am comparing it to kit and software way beyond this price envelope. Scanning is a skill all on its own you need to practice but once you have a method down I think getting the results you need from this device is just a matter of application and patience.