Scientist Creates 3D Scanner App For iPhone

An anonymous reader writes "A research scientist at Georgia Tech has created a 3D scanner app for the iPhone which uses the phone's screen as a light source to quickly capture digital 3D models of faces and other objects. The app, called Trimensional, can output directly to a 3D printer to make physical copies of objects, which a few people have already tried. An Android version is in the works."

Comments

Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a reason lasers are used to perform 3D scans.

The iPhone screen is not a point source of light.

Good luck making any parts which are more than crude attempts
at copies.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Dr Max]

Still, how long before pirating no longer applies to just data?

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Dr Max]

Your forgeting the huge excess manufactures and retailers put ontop of the product cost. I agree that manufacturing costs in a plant will be lower than in your living room. However this technology will get better, 3d printers are on the verge of creating circut boards and even if its twice the price as in the plant and you have to buy some components, it could become feasible.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[ozmanjusri]

There's a reason lasers are used to perform 3D scans. The iPhone screen is not a point source of light.

1. 1. Modify iPhone to add scanning laser.
2. 2. Point iPhone at remaining good eye.
3. 3. ???
4. 4. Profit!

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Osgeld]

kinect uses IR and does decently, yesterdays lasers are quickly becoming todays led's

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

There's a reason lasers are used to perform 3D scans.

The iPhone screen is not a point source of light.

Good luck making any parts which are more than crude attempts
at copies.

That's not what they use the laser for. It's a range finder. You don't actually need a range finder if you use video to extrapolate motion. You can actually capture 3d point cloud data just by using motion tracking software.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[GuldKalle]

Yeah, duh.

But a simple app like this* adds more popularity to 3d scanning and printing than a hundred "easy to solder" 3d scanner schematics. Joe Average would never ever build his own, or even buy a pre-built one.
But if he can be entertained for 5 minutes by a free app, then maybe he could begin to understand the idea of 3d printers. And then maybe they could become economically viable to mass-produce.

*I haven't actually tried the app, but I assume it at least could be made relatively simple to use.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[avgjoe62]

Joe Average would never ever build his own, or even buy a pre-built one.

I would buy a kit that would allow me to assemble my own 3D printer. Do you have an app that can tell me how to do that? ;-)

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Gravitron 5000]

Just think of what pirating could do to our shipping? Oh, the humanity!

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[tlhIngan]

Already happened.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/the-next-napster-copyright-questions-as-3d-printing-comes-of-age.ars

DMCA takedown notices applied to a reverse-engineered puzzle whose plans were posted online.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[toriver]

Joe Average would never ever build his own, or even buy a pre-built one.

There was a time when Joe Average would never buy a laser (or inkjet) printer.

Just tell Joe Average "with this gizmo you can make your own car parts on demand!" and you have an instant sale.

Re:Accuracy ? Poor at best.

[Samantha Wright]

Here's the details. Yes, there are obvious problems with repeats, but it's still noteworthy that we can get such good contigs in all that data. And no, I'm talking about de novo sequencing, not with a reference genome.

Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[WarpedCore]

I'm kind of leaning on the idea that the "anonymous reader" that submitted the article might be the author of the software.

The software barely works. You need to lock yourself in a pitch black room for the thing to even remotely register the geometry correctly. Anywhere with any hint of light other than from your iOS device screen totally throws it off. Put your money into a more worthwhile 99 cent investment/scientific achievement... Fat Booth.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[BoRegardless]

Still cool clever programming.

Wait until they make an iPhone laser scanning accessory so you can do it better.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[cloudmaster]

$4000? The cheapest one I found is $11 with free Prime shipping on Amazon. Heck, a Sony Bloggie is like $250, and it shoots 3D *video*. I'd wager that the quality is at least on-par with some craptacular software for a fanboy cellphone. :)

Yes, I know this is different. I don't care.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MBCook]

I still thought it was kind of neat, and I wanted to use it with my Thing-o-Matic, and at $0.99 I'd happily buy it. But then I start reading the description of the last update: STL and point cloud export available with an in-app purchase. In app purchase cost? $5.

I'm not interested enough to pay $6. I really dislike in-app purchases that are so much more than the app was. If the app included the functionality and cost $3, I'd happily buy it. The app has to generate the same set of triangles whether it's just displaying it on the screen or it's going to be output to STL or a point cloud. I'm sure there is a little more work involved, but I have a hard time believing the export function took 5x the work of the initial version.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[Anonymous Coward]

For your reference: Why You're Cheap

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[DeathElk]

At least he actually did it, not just whinge about how crap it is on an Internet forum.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Yes, I know this is different. I don't care.

You should care because you sound like an idiot. The 'Sony Bloggie' is for capturing stereo footage, not scanning in 3D.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[Osgeld]

OMFG software with REQUIREMENTS?!?

ahhhhh!!!! run!!!!

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[Osgeld]

its a 99 cent app for people who have 300$ + phones and 500$ + makerbot setups, let them act like retards, besides what do you expect out of a phone? George Lucas and Jesus making video holograms a the push of a button?

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[timeOday]

Although, with the right software, geometry reconstruction from stereo imagery would work a lot better than this iPhone app does.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[ksandom]

Think back to your days working in tech support. Remember the noob on the other side of the office who always had a problem and was always looking for a way to tell you your work is wrong?

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[bloodhawk]

It is highly unlikely to EVER significantly improve, It is like trying to use a sledge hammer to open peanuts, sure you can sorta do it, but no matter what they do it will still be a clumsy, stupid and pointless way to do it that can be done a 1000 times more effectively with other devices.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[timeOday]

They Sony "3d Bloggie" does shoot video, not just two still images, so the iPhone has nothing over it. But since the Bloggie has a fixed focal length (no zoom) and a known distance between the stereo images, you could solve for the scale of the scanned object - something you cannot do with a single camera moving around.

As for the parent (intentionally) having a point, I never said that.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

But since the Bloggie has a fixed focal length (no zoom) and a known distance between the stereo images, you could solve for the scale of the scanned object - something you cannot do with a single camera moving around.

Actually, you *can* solve for the scale of a scanned object by moving a camera around. In fact, it's basically the same equation used to extract depth from a pair of lenses in a stereo configuration, it's also the essence of how a 'Match Move' works. Until you start moving those cameras around like you're doing with this app we're talking about, you're not actually going to get a coherent 3d mesh, you're, at best, going to get a depth map, and a very narrow FoV one at that. The way it works is it watches the video for points it can track, when it has enough of them it can work out what the camera move was, and from there it knows where those points are 3-dimensionally. The process you're talking about is virtually the same, it finds common points between the two images, and using a known distance for the camera travel it has a good idea what the depth probably is. The problem is, until you get an actual moving camera there, it can't see enough to actually create a mesh. Even if it could, and why not, the technology is advancing all the time, it's still not seeing anywhere near as much info as a moving camera.

I wasn't kidding when I said I've worked with technology that does both. Believe it or not, I actually work with two different companies trying to achieve the same goal with both of these very techniques. The stereo technique is not *better*.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[timeOday]

Again, the Bloggie *is* a moving camera (in addition to being stereoscopic). But, do you have a reference on solving for the scale of an scanned scanned via moving camera? It seems to me you have to start with some known distance measurement, somewhere.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Again, the Bloggie *is* a moving camera (in addition to being stereoscopic).

Okay, then you'd be doing the same thing the iPhone app is doing only with more data, you do have a point there.

But, do you have a reference on solving for the scale of an scanned scanned via moving camera? It seems to me you have to start with some known distance measurement, somewhere.

The iPhone camera is a fixed focal length also. Even if it didn't have it, though, it is possible (with good footage...) to automatically work out what the focal length is provided it finds good tracking marks. Once it can identify something like 6 tracking marks and assume they aren't moving relative to each other, it has enough info to work out where the camera is. With that info, it can work out where the points are and start making a cloud.

This is how a company like ILM or Digital Domain does a 'Match Move'. Often to prove that the move is accurate, they'll connect the points on the cloud to visually represent the model they just made.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[cloudmaster]

So, when you respond to a message - and quote the original text text - which says "I know this is different", you think the best response is to say "you idiot, it's different!"?

Tonight's homework for you is to read and learn the definition of irony. Hint, it doesn't have anything to do with rain on your wedding day.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[cloudmaster]

You can't spin it to make it look like he had anything resembling a point.

No, he can't - because it was a joke, you thickheaded moron.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

So, when you respond to a message - and quote the original text text - which says "I know this is different", you think the best response is to say "you idiot, it's different!"?

Actually what I said was 'you sound like an idiot', and then I went on to explain why.

Tonight's homework for you is to read and learn the definition of irony.

I did, and funny enough, it didn't apply to me because you didn't read the rest of what I said. I held up my end, so are you going to look up the words 'scan' and 'video'?

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

No, he can't - because it was a joke...

I don't think anybody believes that.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[Ol Olsoc]

Yes, but it will barely work a whole lot cooler when it isn't on an Apple device. Stupid closed system, anyhow.

Re:Story Summary Omits Fact That It Barely Works

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Hahaha!

Awesome

[ChinggisK]

That is just super cool. This is the kind of stuff that gets me excited about the future.

Re:Awesome

[tehcyder]

This is the kind of stuff that gets me excited about the future.

The only thing exciting thing in the future is the royal wedding next week, after that it's all downhill 'til the heat death of the universe.

Why iOS first all the time?

[bogaboga]

I have never got a convincing reason as to why individuals and companies develop iOS applications before Android applications even when Android is clearly more popular than iOS...at least in the USA. Why?

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[Eponymous Coward]

Why not? In this case, the guy is a research scientist and likely doesn't care a whole lot about market share. Secondly, I'm guessing he has an iPhone rather than an Android phone and so he's more likely to develop for the phone he has.

Companies often develop for the iPhone first because iPhone owners are more affluent and spend more money on apps than Android developers.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[MrQuacker]

Because its not just the iPhone. Unless it uses a device specific module (like GPS) then the apps will also work on iPods and iPads. Putting all 3 devices together makes for a number thats vastly greater than Android.

You also have the repeatability factor. If it works on my iPhone, it'll work on yours. With android being on multiple devices, the software may be the same, but the hardware might not.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[jo_ham]

Perhaps the fact that Apple has paid a cumulative 2 billion dollars to third party developers who release apps on the App Store?

While Android is "more popular" (citation needed - how many people are saying "I want an Android phone" compared to "I want an iPhone"? - I will wager that it's not popularity that has given Android its market share, but the plethora of devices it is available on, some of which are cheap and nasty, some of which are definite iPhone competitors).

Either way, the iOS app market is a fixed, well understood target with solid numbers for use, money spent per user, install base etc, while the Android Market is less well understood, and not even available to all Android users.

It is a total no brainer to develop for iOS if you are making a mobile app - 100 million install base, all with access to the store, with only three hardware configurations (iPad not included).

There are benefits to being a walled garden, and this is one of them. There are clearly also downsides.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[shutdown -p now]

Because iOS users purchase more apps. Or, to be more specific, the amount of $$$ spent in App Store over a given period of time is bigger than that in Android Market.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[KingMotley]

Because it isn't. There are more Androids than iPhones, but there are more iOS devices than android devices by a very large margin (50%).

Additionally, the average iOS user is willing to pay more than the average android user.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I have never got a convincing reason as to why individuals and companies develop iOS applications before Android applications even when Android is clearly more popular than iOS...at least in the USA. Why?

Like or hate Apple, developers make money with them.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Relevant : John Carmack on iOS vs Android

"With Rage HD on iOS do you see yourself ever working on Android?
Every six months I’d take a look at the scope of the Android, and decide if it was time to start really looking at it. At the last Quakecon I took a show of hands poll, and it was interesting to see how almost as many people there had an Android device as an iOS device. But when I asked how many peple had spent 20 bucks on a game in the Android store, there was a big difference. You’re just not making money in the Android space as you are in the iOS space."

There's an audio version of the actual poll floating around on Youtube, but I can't find the link right now.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[DarwinSurvivor]

Exactly. Before the iPod touch there were no such things as touch screen PDA's with App Stores. Oh, I'm sorry, you meant making them shiny and "hip"!

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[rolfwind]

I have never got a convincing reason as to why individuals and companies develop iOS applications before Android applications even when Android is clearly more popular than iOS...at least in the USA. Why?

Because iPhone users are actually paying money for the apps.

http://www.mydroid.info/android-apps/guest-post-iphone-vs-android-apps-whos-making-more-money/

The app market is expected to exceed 15 billion dollars in revenues. It is estimated that there will be roughly 17.2 billion app downloads worldwide. The iPhone app market is expected to score about one billion in sales, while Android app sales will generate some 100 million dollars.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[tehcyder]

There is a much higher proportion of idiots amongst iPhone users, so it's easier to mug them.

Re:Why iOS first all the time?

[Ol Olsoc]

Ah, yes, the Iphone user as dolt explanation. Like it or not, if there are going to be applications, there will be a need for people to write them. While some people want to distribute applications freely, out of generosity or simple love of the craft, there will be another group that want to fend off starvation, and might consider writing these things as a way of doing that. And if there are people who might pay for these applications, everyone is happy. Except you.

Gaming the App Store

[Flyerman]

You gain the ability to export through a one-time in-app purchase.

Countdown until...

[dgatwood]

...the inevitable commercial.

You wouldn't copy a VCR.... You wouldn't copy a car.... Don't copy movies....

Re:Countdown until...

[xMrFishx]

I believe it's "You wouldn't download a car". Though I do believe, I would if I could. Oh-ho yes.

Re:Countdown until...

[dgatwood]

The joke is that having cheap, ubiquitous 3D scanners is a critical first step to being able to copy a car.

What wonders, with time for it to mature

[sqrt(2)]

How long before advances in scanning and 3D printing will allow for any object to be analyzed and recreated so cheaply that it replaces traditional manufacturing processes? And then the next step is to cut out the scanning and just make originals from digital schematics. It's probably an inevitability that such an industrial revolution will happen, but I'd really like to see it in my life time; I'll likely live another 60 years even disregarding medical advancements so I think I just might. It's also interesting to think about the restructuring society will be forced into with such advancements. The hilarious parody of the music industry's anti-copying ad, "You wouldn't download a car." might somewhat resemble reality as the traditional power structures of capitalism, finance, and industry struggle for life in their death agony. In a world where every village has a Star Trek-like replicator, there's going to be a lot of pissed off robber barons and Shenzhen factory bosses.

This is a pretty cool demonstration of the technology, but it's just a toy right now. In its mature state it's going to make quite a lot of people nervous and angry. If we thought adapting to an age where information; books, music, movies, ideas, can be replicated and distributed at virtually no cost, we are going to be in for quite the shock when the same paradigm (or one like it, as raw materials will still need to be mined, grown, produced, etc) is brought to physical, tangible objects.

Yes, I would download a car...if I could.

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[crossmr]

How long before advances in scanning and 3D printing will allow for any object to be analyzed and recreated so cheaply that it replaces traditional manufacturing processes?

Until we get star trek like replicators, never.
Unless we're talking about boring plan constructs, like blocks of wood or the like. Anything else you'd have to model an interior as well as interior parts. You're sure as heck not going to be printing yourself up a calculator.

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[SheeEttin]

Yeah, you try printing a car. See how durable ABS plastic is.

As for making originals from digital schematics... It's called computer-aided design, and it's old news. You can probably find schematics for just about anything you'd ever want to make on the Internet.

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[ChinggisK]

Well said! The world will be a very different place once 3D printing technology matures. Assuming, of course, that the current manufacturing industry doesn't realize the threat this will eventually pose and tries to stifle it...

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

How long before advances in scanning and 3D printing will allow for any object to be analyzed and recreated so cheaply that it replaces traditional manufacturing processes?

This is a fun mental exercise, but you need to consider that there's a reason most of the stuff we buy is made up of more than one substance at a time. Try to imagine what would really be involved in 3d-printing a complete PC and you'll start to get the idea. By the time you've accumulated small amounts of gold and silicon and everything else, you might as well have purchased the cheaply made machine whose resources were purchased at a volume discount.

As somebody else stated, you need Star Trek replicators to really make your vision come true.

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[dbIII]

How long before advances in scanning and 3D printing will allow for any object to be analyzed and recreated so cheaply that it replaces traditional manufacturing processes?

Probably never in entirity because a lot of manufacturing processes are very very cheap for making things in bulk. This stuff is very useful but looking for using it to replace absolutely everything else is asking a bit too much of it when some things can be done without requiring as much complication or effort.
Making things from "digital schematics" has been happening from decades with a variety of devices. An undergraduate engineering subject I took in 1988 was effectively about that - writing lisp scripts to convert AutoCAD drawings into G-codes to drive a 3 axis milling machine.
As for 3D printers - even at the "toy" stage they are useful for prototyping and for amazing things like the 1998 effort of making a model of a skull from a CT scan. The skull model was used by a reconstructive surgeon to successfully plan a very complex operation on the deformed child that was the subject of the scan. The operation involved cutting off several bits of skull (six or more) and move them around to build a more normal face and head for the child.

Re:What wonders, with time for it to mature

[telepilot]

See this Economist article for a more wider perspective on 3d printing and the impact it will have on the manufacturing industry

Wrong, iOS is more popular

[unassimilatible]

If you count the iPad, iOS is kicking Android's booty. Besides, the people who buy Androids don't buy apps. They are cheap people who want 1-cent phones, or geeks who think everything should be free. iPhone owners buy way, way more apps, so developers go where the money is.

Re:Wrong, iOS is more popular

[llZENll]

so true, if you look up the figures Apple accounts for 99% of all mobile software sales, andriod doesn't even come close, piracy is rampant on andriod. its bad on ios, but destroying the andriod software market, if it weren't for ios, there wouldn't be hardly any andriod apps. if you are a mobile software developer its pretty much common knowledge your #1 goal is ios, if you then have a hit on ios, then do a port for andriod and expect 1/20 - 1/100th the sales even though there are 10x the number of devices. and expect rampant piracy and a fragmented device market that is a pita to support.

Re:Wrong, iOS is more popular

[MBCook]

Even without the iPad, iOS has a huge installed base thanks to the iPod touch. This app is limited since it needs the front facing camera (limiting it to the iPhone 4, newest iPod, and iPad 2), but it's still a massive number of potential customers.

There is also the fact that the iPhone is easy to develop for, and has a huge development community. Android is supposed to be pretty good (and certainly head-and-shoulders above Symbian), but if you have a question about how to do something on iOS, it's pretty easy to find the answer and lots of sample code.

Re:Wrong, iOS is more popular

[Idbar]

Laptops are and have been more popular than any other mobile devices. They are also more powerful. Why jumping to write this application for iOS or any other cellphone where you know the lack of a light source is very random.

Go ahead and modify a logitech or other webcam with your own light sources IR, laser, LED, whatever and sell your company to them or start the competition.

A "phone app" seems just nor appropriate for the job, just hype.

Re:Wrong, iOS is more popular

[lsatenstein]

I am on pension, as are over 25 million Americans. I have a choice. Doctor bills or iPhone or Android. Well, I ditched the landline and got an Android. And I am very very happy with it. I use the phone as a phone, Not as a game pc or a toy. OK, I can also play music with it, but do I need things that are distractions and time wasters?

Why only faces as examples?

[blindseer]

I could think of all kinds of interesting things to try to get 3D images of with this software, why are all the examples only of someone's face?

Also, the articles mentioned similar software for desktop operating systems. Can anyone name a few? I have a camera built-in to the lid of my triple boot Macbook so I could experiment. Unfortunately my iPod does not have a camera.

Re:Why only faces as examples?

[MBCook]

That was my thought too. It would be so easy to use this to get a model of some small toy like a hot wheels car, or even just something like a few keys on a keyboard.

Re:Why only faces as examples?

[garompeta]

I could think of all kinds of interesting things to try to get 3D images of with this software, why are all the examples only of someone's face?

Precisely, who in his right mind would scan a face?
The first picture a normal sane male would take is his penis.

Re:Why only faces as examples?

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Precisely, who in his right mind would scan a face?
The first picture a normal sane male would take is his penis.

But where would I get the wide angle lens for my iPhone ?

Re:Why only faces as examples?

[Gravitron 5000]

Right here, although this being slashdot, the macro lens is more likely required.

3D self pics...

[s0litaire]

...of the porn variety in 3..2..1..

What if...

[zill]

What would happen if two iphones tried to scan each other at the same?

Singularity?
Implosion of the known universe?
The app author laughing maniacally at the two fools who paid for this app?

Re:What if...

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

What would happen if two iphones tried to scan each other at the same?

The same thing that happens when you put two video cameras in front of each other.

The app author laughing maniacally at the two fools who paid for this app?

Sour grapes?

Mount iPhone/iPod into a sled with a laser ...

[perpenso]

There's a reason lasers are used to perform 3D scans. The iPhone screen is not a point source of light. Good luck making any parts which are more than crude attempts at copies.

Mount the iPhone/iPod into a sled, like they do with credit card readers, that provides the laser and a fixed geometry.

Seriously, it's 12 inches!

[rampant mac]

I can blame the "retina screen" for poor translation to actual size... "No, really, you need to lower your resolution a bit to appreciate it!"

just a thought

[devincook]

I wonder if there's any way to do this with structured light or one of the other 3D scanning methods. I don't know if it would be possible to do with the iPhone screen, but aren't there phones hitting the market soon with those pico projectors built-in? It's my (limited) understanding that there are a lot of different ways it may be possible to improve the accuracy. Man, the future looks awesome.

well boga...

[mevets]

One day, when you move out of your moms basement, you will run up against a number of challenges in our world.
The company that provides electrical power to your moms house wants money in proportion (and then some) to the amount of money your mom extracted from their circuit.
Similarly, the water and fuel companies want a cut. The government wants one for something else, and all this before paying for the actual house.
In effect, they all want money. So, when you step out to this 'democracy of debt', and want to somehow be on the winning side of "time=money"; which app store will you choose?

Old news

[smart_ass]

Tried it months ago when I saw it.
Kinda sucks for now.
Pitch black room
Sketchy accuracy ...

Sure it will push people, which is a good thing.

This however will soon be forgotten.