3/12/2023 0 Comments Photomodeler vs photoscan![]() Thanks for reading and feel free to suggest new testing goals for future comparisons in the comments below!Īnd if you think this review could be useful for your friends and followers, I’d appreciate it if you share it on your favorite social network! I’ll surely do a test to see what software can get the utmost details out of photos, but those presets can easily take up an entire night of processing on my system so be patient. I will continue publishing new test result with different photo sets and testing goals. This is why I started this post as a new series. Read my Full RC Review to see that it can’t always handle non-organic objects well. Also, Realit圜apture might have won this Drag Race in terms of both speed with the Fast preset and quality with the Normal preset, but an organic object like this is very favorable to its algorithms. This post is just an example based on a single photoset from a single object. It also contains no flying particles and is otherwise very clean. ReMake was the only application that correctly rendered the top of the head without a hole, low-poly hole filling or blobby surfaces. Overall the stone details seem to have been smoothed out a bit too much but it’s a good result nonetheless. Although the cheeks have less detail than the result from PhotoScan, the eyes are more defined. While the polycount is the lowest in the lowest of all examples on this page - just 113k polys - it has a lot more detail than the first two. The Standard preset in ReMake has no extra options like the Ultra version is a lot faster. So I chose to only include the locally computed result. I did try this but between uploading and downloading the queue time is too big of a variable to test scientifically. You could process this photoset in through AutoDesks cloud computing service - even with the Free version of ReMake if you wisely discard 7 photos to meet the 50-photo maximum. Photogrammetry Comparison - ReMake (Standard) by Nick Lievendag | 3D Scan Expert on Sketchfab I’m not to keen on using polycounts as a quality metric, but for comparisson: this one has 212k polys. You can enable the Wireframe in the Sketchfab embed through the gear icon to see the large polygons on the top. RC wasn’t able to distill the very top of the head but instead automatically filled the hole. Also the transition between the bust and the book isn’t crisp. The book’s surface looks nice and flat but the edges are far from that. Update 2018: RC now has mesh editing and new selection features. Unfortunately RC doesn’t have any mesh editing tools, so smoothing has to be done externally. This makes the geometry a bit noisy but nothing a smoothing algorithm can’t fix. As far as I understand the Preview preset of Realit圜apture doesn’t use the more sophisticated “depth mapping” technique but instead wraps the polygons straight onto a sparse point cloud. Yes, that’s four minutes - totally crazy! It might not be very detailed but it’s very similar to the result of a scan made with a depth sensor like the 3D Systems Sense 2. Photogrammetry Compare - Realit圜apture(Preview) by Nick Lievendag | 3D Scan Expert on Sketchfab This post is not about creating stunningly beautiful 3D models - it’s about efficiency and productivity. Realistic enough for tight deadlines and small budgets.īecause I think every story should contain an automotive analogy I decided to call this experiment a Photogrammetry Software Drag Race - it’s short, it’s fast, it’s dirty. It’s the exact opposite of doing overnight computations. When I do 3D renders for animation or VFX I call this coffee-break rendering. In general, I found that for everyday projects where speed is more important than ultimate quality, the 15-20 minute mark can be considered “fast”. So I took a processing time average between processing times of depth sensor software like Skanect and professional-grade solutions like EinScan and Artec Studio. It’s good to know that all 3D scanning methods require time for processing and for hardware scanners this greatly depends on the accuracy of the scanner. Often a deciding factor in this is processing time. I’m starting with a test that will be most important when people want to choose between hardware-based 3D scanning and Photogrammetry. Now that I’ve finished my fourth review of a desktop program I though it was time to start a new series where I will benchmark various applications with different kinds of images and goals. I get a lot of questions about the computation speed versus the quality of photogrammetry solutions. Bellus3D Face Camera Pro (IR Sensor, Android).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |