So I've been scanning stuff for a little while, and I never reached even 2000 frames per scan. 16 GB lets you scan up to 4000 color frames, which seems plenty for my approach. I think it's best to scan objects in smaller portions (like just one side at a time), and then merge the scans together. This way you get more control over the cleanliness of your scans I think
I've been looking for a 3D scanner for my own personal work (digital sculpting, want to port some of my traditional sculptures into the digital world to be cleaned up and finished) and this seems like it might be just what I need. I'll have to keep tabs on it, since I definitely can't afford it right now.
Next time scan the boot upside down with a fixture that goes inside where your foot would go. Then you would be able to get 100% of the shoe without having to move it. Soft objects, when moved, will adjust slightly much like a human breathing and can throw off alignment. You can also do a second pass with it sprayed so that it's a more consistent and uniform object to scan.
I would put my leg up and ask someone to scan my foot, ankle and part of my calf, and then 3D print that. Then you can stand that upside down as you suggested. You could also go to a shoe/boot store and see if they will give you one of their plastic display inserts for shoes/boots.
I just placed my preorder and then came across this video , good stuf !! The photo textures were the thing i was most curious about ( i already have a pop2 and a range)
Pretty cool gadget. But anyone hoping it'll shortcut you through modeling/texturing should understand the amount of cleanup makes it impractical. Might seem obvious but since this is a youtube channel promoting a one-man-gamedev journey I wanted to make it clear before somebody drops $800.
@@jorgegokuZ yes and no, the amount of fragments that you're going to have to clean up means that you will most likely want to clean it up before you print. You could just print immediately, but when you look at the actual scan you're going to find a fair amount of defects. Consider the shoe that this guy scanned, all around the ankle area as well as the fill on the inside, fixing that would take so much unnecessary time that you could probably model the shoe faster than you could scan and clean it up. Especially if you consider parts of the shoe important like the tongue or the laces. You're not going to be able to peel that off of the scan. I think what's most useful about 3D scanners is just understanding the real world size and shape and then building a model from those dimensions in modeling software. Like if you're going to model something to print that will fit inside of a groove, I would absolutely love a scanner for that. But otherwise at this level it's just not that beneficial. It's fun to make RU-vid videos, it's just not that practical. Especially for game development. Like this guy won't be using that shoe model in a game. The amount of polygons that exist in that shoe is probably equal to what already exists in his game.
Hi Boro, Thank you very much for the video, it is very illustrative and practical. I want to buy it to scan sneakers. And I'm a little worried about the quality of the textures. I'm not sure the fine details of the fabrics are obtained well. I would have loved to see the result of the sneaker you scanned but with the photographic texture finish, not vertices. It would be of great help if you could upload or leave some of the textures you have obtained here so we can see what the details look like. Thank you very much again for your videos.
Thank you for sharing! I have backed the Miraco but I still have some worries about the texture quality on the scans shown on the Sketchfab page. I would love to see a face or head scan with the ultra high quality textures that are being advertised.
Can you do a few more example scans? Like some more trees / buildings etc? I like the mobility this scanner gives you, but I'm not sold atm (judging by the quality of the scans in this video).
Hello Boro, thanks for sharing. I would really appreciate it if you could upload the texture you captured somewhere. It is only to be able to check the resolution and quality of the details that can be obtained. Thank you so much
man i love your content lately. i miss the pain-overs though. should try and do some 3d ones! This looks... no better or maybe worse than when you used your phone?
Great video. Do you have a video that shows how to clean up a scan in Blender? All of my scans have what I think is noise that ends up in the mesh (areas that are floating but slightly attached to the main object). I can't figure out how to get perfect scans.
You should take a look into getting a DSLR camera with a flash ring and cross polarization filters for textures. 3D scanners will never get great texture quality and especially with filters will help cut down on unwanted shadows and specular highlights.
My experience with structured light scanning goes way back to 2011, and honestly the only way it makes sense to me is scanning with a very fast gpu and good amount of gpu memory onboard. Essentially high FPS is critical for a realtime scanning, as in most cases slow fps causes frequent loss of tracking, then you nees to start over. Plus, slower pace of scanning for a non static subjects ( people) gradually leads to loss of details / precision. I do love the idea of not having to carry both scanner and laptop, but I am concerned, if the amount of processing power here is actually enough to make scanning with this device a fluid and seamless experience.
Yea..imagine how much more useful this device would be if there was a passthrough to allow for direct connection to a powerful laptop or desktop, with the option to use it in its current config. Not sure what bandwidth is required and how that lines up with the latest wifi standard, but wireless link to a pc with gpu would be almost too good!
@@ldt8904 I think for a high precision / detail scanning this would probably require immense bandwidth. Structure sensor / scanect had a wifi connection mode, but the maps resolution on this sensor was relatively low and meshes were prettt lo-fi, comparable to the first generations of kinect.
@@markfreemanvideo USB 3.1 gen 1 maxes out at 5gbps, usb 3.1 gen 2 at 10, and gen 2 2x2 at 20gbps(2x 10gbps lanes) What type of connection does a wired scanner use? Wifi6 has a max bandwidth of 10Gbps which is around 1.25GBps. Seems plausible, especially if the scanner is compatible with USB3.0 Wifi5 is around the same bandwidth as USB3.0; wifi6 is around double that.
nice review.. just a tip In my experience with their other scanners don't smooth the point cloud smooth the mesh i feel like the fusion smooths it TOO much
Answered in the pinned comment, but it's just about how many frames Miraco can hold onto while scanning. I never went over 2000 frames, and 16 GB lets you scan up to 4000 color frames in a single scan (you can have multiple scans for an object and then merge them together easily)
Thank you for this in depth review. I just came here from another channel which pitted it against the Einstar, and his conclusion was the Einstar was better. But it seems he skimmed over a lot of the finer details which can make a big difference in results! Have you tried scanning a bigger, shiny object yet?
the einstar is very good. i have one. its software tracking is better than any of the other low cost scanners. (ive tried creality, several revopops, and the einstar. einstar was better BUT it doesnt do small objects well & its very hardware limited. It's made to work with an intel cpu & nvidia gpu. which has limited me to using my laptop for scanning. This being a stand alone scanner has a lot of benefits for mobility and it does seem to get small objects better. I'm keeping my einstar but I want this too.
@@dakotapahel-short3192 realistically one would imagine their tracking being better they have decades of experience for much more expensive scanners.. however I wonder what it would be like if you compare miraco with the original terrible release of the einstar haha
There was a head to head vs. the Einstar and the Einstar was better in detail and results. I'd love to get one but it just isn't great for scanning cars or interiors for production.
Great timing. My firm just bought a 3d scanner. I have to say it loses tracking quite a lot on uniform surfaces. It cost a shit ton of money and the quality doesn't seem to produce results much better than yours does. Also it needs a laptop and isn't even wireless. Have you tried scanning a big uniform sofa with it and how it handles that? I would be really curious to know cause I do that for a living.
Nah uniform and smooth objects naturally require the help of markers, since the scanning is purely visual (with the color camera and the depth sensors) - so if there's no features to track, you'll need to add them. I don't think there's a tech that would track smooth surfaces perfectly, unless they add a lot more cameras to the scanner pointing in all directions to actually track the room, to perfectly know the location of the scanner itself (like a VR headset). For the sofa I'd use those sticker markers that come in the box
One way I'd do it, if not using markers, is I'd scan in Far mode first - get the overall shape of the object from a bigger distance with mid-level detail, and then I'd add more smaller scans in Near mode wherever there's cool features on the object. Since smooth surfaces don't really require high precision anyway
@BoroCG Ok. So they didn't reinvent the wheel. Our scanner has a white light mode and an IR mode. White light mode is strobing light and usually gives better results as long as the surface has some texture to it. But it really depends on the fabric of the sofa. It only has issues going around sharp corners where it loses tracking the most. I also had the thought it would need some gyroscope or something comparable to always know it's position in space. That would be really useful.
@BoroCG that's a good idea for a scanner that has a far mode. The working distance for our scanner is like 580mm max. So you can't capture it from a proper distance.
What scanner is it that the company bought? With any of these scanners there are always learning curves to get the best result. This process is not easy like making popcorn in the microwave.
Very cool and interesting. I have a question, I am not very familiar with 3d scanning. Is it possible for me to scan a leather jacket and take the base colour, normal maps and displacements and all those and apply them to a jacket model I created? I am not good with texturing, I thought maybe I can basically take textures from life objects and apply them to models I created
Yes, wrap your base mesh jacket to your 3d scan and then you can texture transfer the scan texture to your base mesh since they are now overlapping meshes
I realized that I never checked if it will be compatible with my MacBook Pro M1.. do you know if that will be a problem?
11 месяцев назад
Great device. I'm still just using photogrammetry right right because I bought everything for it and need to use it. But I can see myself saving sometime with that scanner. You should do a test of precision between that scanner and the photogrammetry technique. I wanted which one will get you finer detail point could and results. I can see scanning a car with it but will stay with photogrammetry for now
Personally from what I've seen so far, the quality of color texture on this one is still doesn't match photogrammetry. And with a moving objects (like scanning faces / people) I don't think any structured light scanner can match the precision of a multi camera photogrammetry rig. The other reason for me to stick with photogrammetry, is being able to use cross polarization to get a clean diffuse color maps, separated from reflectance. But if you only need a good mesh, yes, it seems to be the way to go, much faster process for acquiring meshes.
Depends on which technology you'd be printing on. In general you'll have to make the model be water tight otherwise it may cause issues with the 3D printer.
I'd say no. It's possible for sure, but it'd take a while, since even the Far mode is only capturing at about 1 meter or less. This scanner is mostly targeting objects - big or small - but not whole locations. I'd actually use an iphone pro with a lidar sensor for locations, worked well for me before
6:34 would it not work to add a bright flat aperture light ontop of the unit so it’s evenly lighting everything it’s facing I would say also for scanning around the bottom of a shoe etc I would recommend suspending the shoe from the ankle hole using a tripod I would stuff the shoe as you did and then sit it upside down onto the head of a tripod. Saying that depending on what’s happening in the game or render i don’t see the need to have such high definition scans of the sole of a shoe it just uses more recourses and time for something you may not see or even notice and this is why we now have games that take up over 170GB because they decide to include 4k 3D models of bullet casings and zippers
