Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Toys Graphics Software

Build a Rotisserie Scanner With Legos 173

Posted by michael from the yes,-the-plural-is-legos dept.
WalkingBear writes "All you 3d geeks out there should take a look at this. This guy has built a 3d scanner (scans 3d objects resulting in a 2d cylindrical image map) out of a flat bed scanner and Lego. Also has a turntable style for use with digital cameras."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Build a Rotisserie Scanner With Legos More

Build a Rotisserie Scanner With Legos

Comments Filter:

  • This is a DMCA violation. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:43PM (#6259602)
    This user has no right to alter the use of this scanner in such a manner without a license. I will be informing the proper authorities of this illegal violation - Cmdr Taco
  • I thought the plural for lego is lego... not legos???
    • No, but its a common mistake because multiple legos form a collective lego.
    • Correct.

      One lego brick.
      Two lego bricks.
      Many lego bricks.

      Check the lego website where they state this very clearly.

      Similarly:
      One beef burger.
      Two beef burgers.
      Not two beefs burger.

      One red car.
      Two red cars.
      Not two reds car.

      One SCO lawsuit.
      Two SCO lawsuits.
      Not two SCOs lawsuit.

      Understand yet?
  • Couldn't that be done with a regular 2d scanner?
    • Yes, that's what he did. I know Slashdot protocol is to not read the article, but try to make an exception for the summary of the article, at least...
      • I thought he made a sort of depth sensor, for building a 3d model from a real object.

        • Read the whole article (Score:4, Informative)

          by Man In Black ( 11263 ) <`ac.wahs' `ta' `or-ez'> on Saturday June 21, 2003 @02:01AM (#6260183) Homepage
          If you look all the way to the bottom, he takes that creepy warped skull image and wraps it on a 3D model to make something that almost looks like a 3D skull. It looks kind of crummy, but it's decent for a start, and much better than anything I've done in the same field (absolutely nothing).

          He never explicitly says what his purpose in all this was (although he claims inspiration from the Matrix), but I guess he's wanting to use this to make it easier to get textures for 3D objects based on actual objects.

          The scanner in no way reads depths though... the 3D model he uses in the end is NOT determined by the scanner. That would take a hell of a lot more work, and probably lots of those 2x1 blocks that always seem to run out.
    • Yeah, why don't you get on it. Let's see your results.

  • Okay Okay (Score:5, Insightful)

    by msgmonkey ( 599753 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:45PM (#6259614)
    Well I know there will be people out there who will moan about things like this, but you got to say this i pretty f'ing cool.

    This touches two vital "geek nerves" - Hack value and use of Lego.
    • Are you a robot? Why would someone moan about this? I think this thing was pretty cool, but I am wondering more on how the scanner actually worked, as he didn't go into much detail on it, the camera thing seemed todo better, but I don't see a big deal, because all he did was spin the thing around and take pictures of it, it wasn't where you just put it in there, and it spun it by itself and did the pictures automatically. What I think would be best is it the camera went around the object and took the pictur

      • Movie (Score:2)

        by xombo ( 628858 ) *
        Until I noticed the DivX movie [chromecow.com], I didn't realise how it actually worked, now I see, it seems that this wouldn't work with objects of different shape and size, so now I understand the camera approach, it seems that the scanner idea neede a little more innovation and work though.

        • Re:Movie (Score:3, Funny)

          by Moofie ( 22272 )
          OK, 'scuse me.

          This person made a device that they found useful, and you have the AUDACITY to tell them to get back to work until it suits YOU!?

          Who the FUCK do you think you are?
  • He uses windows software for this project!
    Start your bashing engines, gentlemen!

    He could have used Linux, The Gimp, and SANE and his project would have been so much more cooler.

    • Re:Oh my god, look (Score:1, Informative)

      by aseidl ( 656884 )
      Actually, couldn't you use Gimp's Map to Object -> Sphere thing to make it look like the object is spinning? You would have to make a square selection, map it to the sphere, save it as a layer, then move on to the next square selection. Though you'd have to somehow fix the distortion caused when stretching the image to map it to the sphere...
      You'd probably want to make yourself a script for Script-Fu to do it for you.

  • Temporary mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by Peter Cooper ( 660482 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:50PM (#6259636) Homepage Journal
    That inner page of his is like 660KB all in, so I can see this guy's server taking a crunch real soon. His JPEGs were uber-unoptimized, so I've optimized them and put up a temporary mirror so you can all see the joy that is the rotissery scanner :-) It will disappear in a few hours or so.

    Rotissery Scanner Mirror [bigbold.com]

  • Not a 3D scanner (Score:5, Insightful)

    by woodhouse ( 625329 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:51PM (#6259644) Homepage
    I was genuinely interested in this story, as I'm an indie game programmer, and any easy way to generate 3D art is welcome. However, what this guy has created is not a 3D scanner. It's a 2D cylindrical scanner. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but I can't see any way to convert the resulting image into a 3D mesh, at least not without some very clever software which the inventor has neglected to write.

    • Re:Not a 3D scanner (Score:3, Informative)

      by cybermace5 ( 446439 )
      There is some other software available, which I can't be bothered to look for right now. It works like this: say you have a few pictures of an object, from several known angles. Then the program allows you to define common points and edges on each photo. Since the program knows what angle each photo was taken from, it can do the math to build a 3D mesh of the object.

      Don't remember what it was called, but I used it a few years ago. Someone else get some karma and Google up a link.
      • That's the only one I know of [photomodeler.com].

      • Re:Not a 3D scanner (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        There are two that I know of:

        Photomodeller [www.photomodeller.com] - where you specify verticies and edges on a series of photos taken from different perspectives. It will generate the 3d mesh and map the images onto the faces -- good for regularly shaped objects in particular.

        The other is D Scupltor from D Vision Works [www.d-vw.com] where you take photos from regular angles of an object (using a rotating turntable such as he has built) and reference markers in the image. The software will then generate

      • Re:Not a 3D scanner (Score:3, Informative)

        by mnemonic_ ( 164550 )
        There is REALVIZ ImageModeler [realviz.com].

        The technology of deriving 3d geometry information from 2d images is typically known as image-based rendering. Gabe Newell (head of Valve Software) said that this is one of the technologies they didn't have enough time to get into Half-Life 2. It was first demonstrated in The Campanile Movie [debevec.org] and has since been used for special effects purposes in movies (including the Matrix). It is very impressive, not only for its ability to generate the geometry from the images, but also
    • well ... on his site he has a pic of a skull that he scanned in and mapped to a 3d mesh :| :D
    • a 3d model generator is nothing like a 3d image generator. what he has done here is very cool. if you want to generate models, do this same experiment but instead of a scanner use an array of a few dozen IR rangefinders arranged in a line. rotate the object, fire, record depths, repeat. Map the resulting heightmap onto the inside of a cylinder in your program of choice. Instant 3d mesh.
    • The spinning part and a mounted camera is a good start. What is missing is a set of sensors that measure distance to the spinning object, at various heights.

      This is actually not completely impossible to do (but a royal pain), I have heard of guys who did it in lab classes in college. The most troublesome part is suppose to be converting all the distance readings into a useful data format.

      Tor

    • Re:Not a 3D scanner (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Moofie ( 22272 )
      Uh, what part of "scans 3d objects resulting in a 2d cylindrical image map" did you not understand!?

      Inventor has neglected to write...well, I'll be sure to go put my boot on their neck and tell 'em to get their lazy ass back to work.

      Wanker.
      • The skull scan is definitely NOT a cylindrical projection, the irregularities at the top of the skull in the assembled image make it obvious. Notice he posed the skull in the final image so you couldn't see the sloppy job he did as it appears on the top.
        A better cylindrical map would have taken, say, 360 slit scans of one row of vertical pixels taken 1 degree apart, then lined them all up. This would have smoothed out the errors. He only did 8 scans and that ain't enough.
        • How about you quit your bitching and do a better job?

          Really steams me when somebody looks at a project some clever soul has obviously done on a lark, and says "Well, that's hardly good enough for MY purposes."

          Loser.
          • I'm not bitching at the crappy job, I'm just informing you that it isn't even close to a real cylindrical projection , like he claims it is. Go study your projective geometry before you whine about things outside your limited expertise.

            And yes, I've done better, with less equipment too. That's what I WAS DESCRIBING.

            Well, at least your .sig, "Loser" was accurate.
    • Okay, if you want a 3D mesh, here's what I would do:

      (1) Encase the thing in a black box [or work at night], and put a light on the y-axis of the scanner, and a red light on the axis of the rotisserie, near it, but not inside it [of course]

      For your lights, use a good small fluorescent bulb.

      (2) Run a normal scan.
      (3) Light the thing from the North with blue light, and from the west with red light. Keep each light as *close* to the rotisserie as possible, and on the scanner side [of course].
      (4) Run another

  • Impressive. Next project? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Call Me Black Cloud ( 616282 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:53PM (#6259649)

    I'm impressed. He built a very cool system. I'd be more impressed if he could devise a means in which his web page displayed in the fullness of my browser, instead of being limited to a tiny window in the center. I'm telling you, once someone conquers the "fit to window" problem this World Wide Web thing is really going to take off. Mark my words, someone will make money off it.

  • The catch... (Score:5, Informative)

    by EvilFrog ( 559066 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @10:55PM (#6259658)
    The funny thing is, if you read the article you'll see that he's gotten better results by just stitching digital photos together. The scanner has actually given him rather poor images (he's got a nasty light leak), and you need to be able to put the thing you're scanning on a spit...
    • Just like a satilite stitch? Well, ok, it might work with steady hands [hillnotes.org].

      Another way to get a realy fine scan like this would be to mount your digicam on one of these [ebay.com], or a lathe.

      That's enough activity for me. Good night.

    • ...and he'd have even better luck if he was using PanoTools to do the stitching for him.

    • his delima. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by twitter ( 104583 )
      if you read the article... The scanner has actually given him rather poor images (he's got a nasty light leak), and you need to be able to put the thing you're scanning on a spit.

      Yeah, he admits all that. His problem was that the scanner does a calibration every time, which requires motion of the scanning element relative to the bed. It's got some patern in there. It turned out to be easier to make this amusing rig that rides along and spins the object than it was to try to mount the cal patern on a rot

  • Got Mesh? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by JVert ( 578547 ) <corganbilly@hotmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Friday June 20, 2003 @11:02PM (#6259688) Journal
    This is great for skinning i'd like to see people finish it up with some software that will mesh the images together in a batch proccess. Then you can get as detail as you'd like (1 pixel width per shot anyone?)

    But what I really would like is some info on how to make meshes. I've heard about people using lamp projectors with grids on them, shine that one the persons face and then the software can follow the gridpoints making a mesh.

    Then use a similar technique to follow body movements (flashlights at all the joints/tips on a body in a dark room)

    Exciting times..

    With a mesh and skinning proccess simplified and cheap enough for anone interested.

      1. Set up a digital camera on a tripod.
      2. Record motion with movie with your choice of resolution
      3. Get movie via CF to PCcard adaptor.
      4. use xanim (only non free used) frame advance and screen capture frames you want.
      5. insert each frame as a layer in a gimp drawing
      6. turn on each layer and mark what you want on a transparent layer which is your motion study.

      Bonus - export the frames back as an mpeg or other format. Stop animation, it's not exactly film gimp. Come to think of it, this woud make capturing turntable

    • Re:Got Mesh? (Score:5, Funny)

      by limekiller4 ( 451497 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @11:50PM (#6259848) Homepage
      JVert writes:
      "This is great for skinning..."

      I'll take your word for it. My cat absolutely refuses to get in it.
    • Actually for motion capture (a la Matrix), you'd do better in a black unitard--like full body tights-- with a grid of little day-glo dots... even different colored front and back faces. i.e., yellow for front, blue for back.

      Darken the room, black curtains, and use blacklight to light the figure. The dots will POP way above the level of the black or any face/hands shown.

      Would be a very cool app to do this from moderatly-low-quality webcams... =^)

      • Mocap is a helluva lot more complex than that. You need a motion server, either electromagnetic or optical system with numerous detectors, software that interfaces with said hardware and software for cleaning up the raw data. Using some cameras and tracking the points by hand is far from actual motion capture (a la Matrix).
    • Such software exists. It is called Rotomapper, and can be found here [graphyx.net], hosted on my website. I did not make the original application, and google turns up nothing on the filenames or application title. I just uploaded it now. I don't remember where I found it.

      A home-made 3d scanner does not seem unfeasible. It would require having a computer-controllable laser range finder mounted on a vertical post, which is connected to a horizontal post. The laser could slide vertically on its post while the vertica

  • Legos (Score:2)

    by shird ( 566377 )
    err.... shouldnt that be 'lego', not legos. Hate to be pedantic, but the plural of lego is lego.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • hahah good call.

        Specifically (from that document the parent post linked to):

        Proper Use of the LEGO Trademark on a Web Site
        If the LEGO trademark is used at all, it should always be used as an adjective, not as a noun. For example, say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGO BRICKS". Never say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGOs".Also, the trademark should appear in the same typeface as the surrounding text and should not be isolated or set apart from the surrounding text. In other words, the trademarks should not be emphasized or h

    • It's also capitalized, you pedant.

      LEGO.

  • What will they think of next (Score:3, Funny)

    by BigDork1001 ( 683341 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @11:04PM (#6259698) Homepage
    First a "bone printer" [slashdot.org] and now a lego scanner. What's next, a cardboard monitor???

  • (Legos...is there nothing the can't do?)
    [emphasis mine]


    Apparently the answer is: "Correct my diction."

    Cool hack, though.

    -Peter
  • [Insert obligitory perverse comment] But seriously... I'de love to see a lego vibrator... custom tailored to you're passion ;)

    • Re:Legos...is there nothing the can't do? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "custom tailored to you're passion"

      Im starting too think that leggos have a deleterious affect on speling and grammer. maybee its contajus. oh shitt...
  • As I was reading the article it took me a minute to really notice the picture of the skull. Well to notice that it was showing the back of the skull at the same time.

    With that being said... Imagine what this could do for game skinners. Now using an old scanner and some legos you can easily skin in your own face to UT2k3 and other games.

  • Infomercials (Score:4, Funny)

    by JasonMaggini ( 190142 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @11:31PM (#6259789)
    Expect to see Ron Popeil selling this soon...

    "Just scan it, and forget it!"

  • Is this flatland? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    All the geeks I know are 3d geeks, though some are guilty of being one-dimensional at times.

  • A specialized viewer (Score:4, Informative)

    by dgenr8 ( 9462 ) on Friday June 20, 2003 @11:59PM (#6259873) Journal
    ...could deproject the scanned image to represent the object from an arbitrary angle, or create an ultra-smooth animation of it rotating about the scanned axis. It's the exact analog of the way a QTVR cylindrical panorama is rendered into a window, only there you're inside the object instead of outside.

    This technique could be incredibly useful for creating photorealistic views of 3D objects from any angle about one axis.

    Wish I'd thought of it. Now how long until IPIX patents it?

    • Sure you could wrap the image around a perfect cylinder, but without knowing the "stetch factor" at the top and bottom, you wouldn't know how close to the center of the cylinder to render that point.

      Think of it like rendering a sky in games like doom/quake/half-life/etc. The sky is really just a very large box with a sky texture applied to the inside. You as a player are inside the box so you don't realize it's a box. Once you go outside the box, it becomes painfully obvious that there is no sky, just a bo
      • I agree. Mapping the image around a cylinder would look as photorealistic as a mercator map of the world rolled into a cylinder. That's why the guy mapped his skull image onto a rough model of a skull, not a cylinder.
      • No, it's certainly doable, and has been done in the past. It's actually quite easy to make it look convincingly accurate as long as the position of the viewer doesn't change (rotation is fine, just no movement). It's still possible if the viewer moves, but it requires many more images of the object from many more angles.

  • How about a real rotisserie? (Score:3, Funny)

    by pen ( 7191 ) on Saturday June 21, 2003 @12:07AM (#6259891)
    Next Lego post on Slashdot, I want to see something that will cook a chicken!
  • Legos... Is there nothing they can't do?

    Anyone out there know Latin? I'm thinking of having that translated and placed on my Coat of Arms. Come to think of it, it probably wouldn't look that bad as my epitath, either.

  • What this needs is structured light [purdue.edu] in order to be able to actually create a 3D model from the scans. Do one scan with the structured light to get the model, then another normal scan to get the texture to map onto it.
  • I am getting flashbacks to when I saw H.R. Giger's work when I saw that deformed skull on th left! It's Aliens all over again! http://www.hrgiger.com/ [hrgiger.com]

  • Mehh (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It doesn't look like that big of a deal. I made this one [eightlines.com] and this one [eightlines.com], using a swiveling chair and a digital camera.

    Until it stiches the images automatically and looks good I won't be impressed.

    He says he is having problems with lighting, that's because the lighting and the person have to remain stationary while the camera goes around the object. That way the shadows will stay the same. Spot the funky shadows in my images.

  • As kewwwl as this is... (Score:4, Funny)

    by geekwench ( 644364 ) on Saturday June 21, 2003 @12:55AM (#6259988)
    ...the Lego(s) by themselves aren't quite geeky enough to merit all of the fuss. Now, if he found a way to add a liquid nitrogen sprayer, or a flamethrower; that would absolutely rock!

    Wait - this wasn't another BattleBots thread?

    Okay, to be (relatively) serious - it's a fun adaptation, and goes far beyond the usual motorized crane / walking dinosaur constructions. It needs to be tweaked (i.e. fixing the light leak, and a few other things) before it is really usable in a practical** sense, but it gets all kinds of kudos in the "nifty idea; let's see if it works" department.

    Now, if he can find a way to build a genuine 3D cylindrical scanner out of Lego(s), that would elevate him to uber-geek status in a heartbeat!

    **not that practical usage ever had anything to do with building wonderful toys...

  • Rotisserie BBQ made of lego! (Score:3, Funny)

    by SirDrinksAlot ( 226001 ) on Saturday June 21, 2003 @01:07AM (#6260017) Journal
    I would be more impressed if somebody made a Rotisserie BBQ out of lego. Works with real gas and cooks real chicken!

    To make it a real trick give it a linux box to control the heat and cooking time :)

    Better yet, put the linux box inside and cook that!
  • soooo, this doesnt give you an image of a spit roasted chicken? </poor humour>

    yeah, that was pretty cool... so when does it go into production? (yes that first closed tag was a trick to get you to read this other lame joke, i admit it... i'm sorry)

  • So, do you.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by nuckin futs ( 574289 ) on Saturday June 21, 2003 @07:30AM (#6260793)
    just set it and forget it ?
  • First of all - this is definately one of the cooler home-brewed inventions I've seen in the last while. Yes, it uses lego, but the actual result is quite impressive.

    It seems that the developer used a scanning bar from a flatbed scanner to make this work though. It also mentions that calibration is a problem do to the issue with the scanner's initial alignment routine.

    I have in my possession an old LogiTech hand-scanner, you just scan it over the paper onto the screen (slowly). I am wonder if this would
  • So that's what it looks like from the other side...hehe.

    Well, as far as I can tell, the server didn't melt. Hope everyone enjoyed my kooky little experiment.

    Thanks for stopping by!

Slashdot Top Deals

"No matter where you go, there you are..." -- Buckaroo Banzai

Close