Slashdot Mirror
Software Converts 2D Images To 3D
eldavojohn writes "Dr. David McKinnon from Queensland University of Technology, has recently launched a site that turns your sets of 2D images into 3D bump maps by way of 8 years of his research. The catch is that you need to have between five and fifteen photos of your object and they must overlap at least 80 to 90 percent. So with a video of an object, one might be able to extract every nth frame and use this site to generate a 3D model. Doctor McKinnon said, 'The full version of this software would be great for realistic learning simulators and training software, where you want everything to look like the real thing. This technology could also be great for museums wishing to turn their display objects into 3D images that can be viewed online. We are even looking into making 3D models of cows to save farmers spending thousands of dollars transporting their cattle vast distances to auction sites, allowing for an eBay style auction website for cattle. Films, animations and computer games could also benefit, since 3D film making is taking over from the traditional 2D method of filmmaking. Another application is allowing people to create 3D models of their own face to use on their avatar in computer games or 3D social networking sites such as Second Life or Sony's Home.' Physorg has more details."
between five and fifteen photos of your object and they must overlap at least 80 to 90 percent.
So the 3D object in question will only have a front side? That's nowhere near enough for all sides.
Cows are spherical, as every mathematician knows.
Article title is misleading. A bump-map is less exciting than converting 2D to 3D. It's not like it's going to build a perfect model of your head from 15 photos.
Photosynth is far more interesting if you're excited by this concept.
Porquoi?
. . . http://www.mndl.hu/works/fractalcow
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
It is impossible to in general extract a true 3D image from a single 2D image. There are ambiguous cases. In fact, there are even ambiguous cases for two images. When one uses CAD and such to make 3D out of 2D images one is making implicit choices (generally using heuristics about how the objects are likely shaped). One can however use multiple images from slightly different angles to extract a close to unambiguous result. However, doing that is not easy and that seems to be what they are doing here.
is uploading about 15000 pics of Halle Berry as we speak. Man I'm gonna have a blast tonight!
You take the cow to auction to sell it - to get it off your farm and on to someone else's. The point of the auction is to move the cow. It might be somewhat more efficient to move the cow directly from farmer to farmer, but this intermediate stop at an auction house can't be that big an inconvenience, can it?
It sounds like a solution in search of a problem.
Even better, they only require ONE image.
In other words, it's not the same problem.
This guy has wasted his life.
Ouch. So if it's not a huge discovery in an entirely new research area, it's worthless? Would you be willing to apply this criterion to your own accomplishments?
This guy has wasted his life. ... There are dozens of programs that do this for various prices. Even better, they only require ONE image.
Okay, smart-ass, here's your ONE image.
...except Crazybump (http://www.crazybump.com/) is faster, funnier, and has more features. Indispensable for 3D shader development.
What happens if we use this for videos (which are just sequences of generally overlapping images)?
If any progress could be made in this department, we could make video game maps by simply recording a factory with a video camera.
That's nothing! CSI Miami takes crappy security cam shots from hundreds of feet away to turn a speck that covers eight pixels into a full 3D model of the killer every week, and that's in THIS century and planet!
It's quite possible to build one, but it only works from one angle.
If you were in the tree (where the girl's left arm is pointing) you'd see something like:
/
\|
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
If you are really going to try and take your technology mainstream, you may as well go and get a bunch of Shroud of Turin pictures, use your technology to reconstruct Jesus in 3d, and get yourself a guest TV spot on Fox. If your Jesus winds up looking like Peter O'Toole, so much the better!
This is my sig.
I have mod points but I just had to reply while the laugh is still fresh.
An ASCII picture of a Penrose triangle. Never thought I'd live to see the day. Well done Sir.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
The FIRST WORD of the story is 'Dr', closely followed by his name. Did that not clue you into the fact that he already has a PhD?
Here is another one in Australia from multiple angles. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Perth_Impossible_Triangle.jpg
Bump mapping is often used to add textures to otherwise flat surfaces. Basically, the bump map is a channel where the intensity of a pixel represents the height (rather than colour) of the pixel.
It's very similar to this toy, which I'm sure you've probably seen before. The bump map represents the 3D shape of the object being portrayed. (It does have certain limitations; since each pixel can only have one height, the bump map can't represent surfaces which fold over themselves... e.g. a bump map of your face would look like your face from the angle it was intended to be viewed from, but from other angles you'd notice that the nostrils were solid underneath.)
Once you've generated a bump map, you can use it to render a true 3D surface, calculating the shadows based on the bump map and the position of the light source.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I'm posting this really late in the thread so maybe nobody will read it (or care) but...
If there is one place on earth that is crying out to see this technology used it is the KILOMETERS (really!) worth of intricate stone carvings at Angkor Wat (Cambodia). I've thought about borrowing (stealing?) a friend's $500,000 laser scanner to capture them but the 1) he (his institute really) probably wouldn't let me 2) the thugs who run Cambodia would probably not let me use it without me paying some extortionate amount. There really is no-where else on earth where you can see the results of thousands of man-years of skilled stone carvers. This priceless cultural heritage should be captured before pollutants like acid rain slowly erodes it or thieves literally dynamite it to pieces.
Now perhaps anyone with a good video camera, a steady hand, and a LOT of patience can get this done! Perhaps if this job is too large for any one individual to complete it could be done in sections and the individual video sequences shared over the internet. Anyway, I hope this software is modified to handle video (subject to certain restrictions such as shooting in progressive mode).