Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Hello Pilgway team,

 

this is thought to be a suggestion.

 

I just entered into the space of 3d-scanning and

it came to my mind, that 3d-coat might be well prepared

for the handling of point-clouds and all related stuff,

like fusion of multiple scan-data and last not least

proper mesh-generation from pointclouds.

 

I guess 'retopology'-algorithms and 'pointcloud 2 mesh'-ones

are somehow related? And since mesh-repair is also focused on 

in the latest releases of 3d-coat, it would be nice to be able to use

3d-coat in the scan>mesh-workflow as well.

 

As I said - its a suggestion only, but there is an increasing number

of people out there, who are not only getting involved with 3d-printing

but also with 3d-scanning.

 

Best regards and thx for giving us 3d-coat

 

Klaus Middendorf

Edited by define
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

3DCoat can already import point data but it comes with no features which allow precision matching sets of pointcloud data and automatic

curvature based repair of missing parts. The question I have is: What's the point?

Commercial 3D scan hardware comes with software which does exactly the above described and also photogrammetry based scan-software like

Agisoft ship with data set matching capabilities and mesh export.The result in all cases can get loaded into 3DCoat, if there's vertex colour or textures

one may even use this data as well. People use 3DCoat with scan data already from the beginning. What is in your way exactly?

Edited by polyxo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

3DCoat can already import point data but it comes with no features which allow precision matching sets of pointcloud data and automatic

curvature based repair of missing parts. The question I have is: What's the point?

Commercial 3D scan hardware comes with software which does exactly the above described and also photogrammetry based scan-software like

Agisoft ship with data set matching capabilities and mesh export.The result in all cases can get loaded into 3DCoat, if there's vertex colour or textures

one may even use this data as well. People use 3DCoat with scan data already from the beginning. What is in your way exactly?

Hello Apprentice,  

 

well - my way is - thinking about voxels as point-like building blocks/elements it came to my mind, that one might consider importing point-clouds 

as voxel-clouds. Like digital 'sinter-material' so to speak. The voxel-'fill'-tool has the properties that might fit here. I'm thinking of

a slider, that lets us define gap-tolerance between the 'Point-voxel-elements' and by that 'fill' the gaps up and produce a nice solid object.

The known meshing algorithms, like poison have a lot of drawbacks.

Usually lots of details get lost. May be it was worth thinking about such an approach? What do you think?  best regards  klaus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I doubt that any practical implementation of Voxels can be more efficient in capturing detail than meshes. Exactly that limitation in terms of high frequency

detail led the 3DCoat-makers to development of a secondary sculpting workspace which allows working on the triangulated mesh directly (the surface-mode in

the Voxel-Room). Triangulated meshes can relatively easily get adapted in density, while typical Voxel implementations dice a volume evenly.

While generally possible I think there's no product in the market which uses adaptive Voxel density. Even if one had this established: One needed

a secondary layer of geometry for viewport shading. This render mesh had to be constructed adaptive in density too, therefore one had two complex items

which had to get rebuilt upon each brush stroke.

I could imagine that meshing algorithms offered in software which is more geared towards a Nurbs Reverse Engineering workflows have other priorities:

Maximum reduction of polygon count is one, getting an idealized shape by reducing surface noise is another. In contrast to other target programs for scan data

in 3DCoat there's not much need for polygon reduction - one should rather try to feed in a relatively raw and unprocessed mesh.

Edited by polyxo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Hi Polyxo,  thanks for your thoughts on this anyway. 

 

May be this (link) led me to my ideas.  "interactive volumetric reconstruction":

 

 

Have a look.

 

Even SketchUp offers importing of PointClouds in the near future.

It seems an interesting field.

 

http://extensions.sketchup.com/en/content/trimble-scan-explorer-extension

 

I guess it might at least be worth keeping an eye on it.

 

best regards

 

Klaus

Edited by define
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Have a look.

Hmm, what I'm looking at in this presentation are on the fly generated meshes based on Kinect generated point clouds.

Otherwise one would not have this shading. Whoever exports point clouds from here discards existing meshes.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against direct point cloud support but I fail seing what the Voxel paradigm could add

in terms of quality or performance when converting points to volumes.

Edited by polyxo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Member

Triangulated meshes can relatively easily get adapted in density, while typical Voxel implementations dice a volume evenly.

While generally possible I think there's no product in the market which uses adaptive Voxel density.

 

 

 

 OpenVDB allows for adaptive density voxels, among many other things, like the point cloud to voxel conversion the original poster requested.

Edited by Aabel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 OpenVDB allows for adaptive density voxels, among many other things, like the point cloud to voxel conversion the original poster requested.

 

 

 

One would be foolish to be against tech which could lead to performance improvements in the Voxel workspace!

From looking at the OpenVDB website and also the paper you linked however, I got the impression that one has goals

which differ quite a bit from interactive sculpting: Its rather effective large data representation in rendering and simulations.

Also here stuff gets voxelized but afaik one still will need triangulated meshes alongside with the Voxels. Andrew will know

best whether this tech could make sense inside 3DC.

Edited by polyxo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

The things that make OpenVDB a fantastic solution for rendering in feature film should also apply to general 3d modeling. You are right though only Andrew can say for sure. I do hope he looks into beefing up the voxel toolset as voxels are starting to gain ground in gaming and general production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...