Multiple photographs
by David Hollister · in Artist Corner · 03/07/2003 (11:37 pm) · 9 replies
So, as a programmer (and with very little artistic ability), I had a thought which I had hoped was already turned into software by someone else. It seems possible to take multiple photographs of an object (against a solid background) and use the difference in the images to generate a 3d model.... Yeah, it might not be the best way to make a model. Anyway, I found one (1) program that claims to do the job, but I'm not impressed with their samples page, and there is no demo (motionparallax.com - software is 1-2-3d). So, does anyone know of software to do this, or even if the results would be usable. Thanks.
#2
03/08/2003 (12:12 am)
Hm... Don't see anything relating to model generation there.
#3
http://www.realviz.com/products/im/index.php
Somewhat tough to use, but the results are pretty nice.
03/08/2003 (7:04 am)
RealViz Image Modeler V3.0http://www.realviz.com/products/im/index.php
Somewhat tough to use, but the results are pretty nice.
#4
03/08/2003 (7:20 am)
generating a complex 3d model is going to require work regardless of the method. I thought you were talking about generating shapes from images with the engine at run time. hmm there may be a way to do the same thing with 3ds max or lightwave.
#5
03/10/2003 (6:41 pm)
Well just to let everyone know, I'm very impressed with ImageModeler. This was exactly what I was talking about. It still takes work, but for those who have difficulty modeling (me), and if you can take digital pictures of the item to be modelled, it produces much better results that doing it by hand. Also, they are up to v3.5 now. I found an old demo for 3.0 and I found the interface to be lacking, and it crashed on me several times. The new version is much better, IMO. Anyway, thanks for the tip.
#6
www.d-vw.com/dsculptor/about/about_d_sculptor.htm
and Photomodeler:
www.photomodeler.com/
and uzr3d:
www.uzr.de/en/products.html
Yes, I have an interest in photogrammetry/image-based modeling ;)
One thing to remember is that while these tools are now capable of some pretty impressive results, you're not likely to get as optimal a result as you would from a talented artist.
03/10/2003 (8:43 pm)
You may also be interested in D-Sculptor:www.d-vw.com/dsculptor/about/about_d_sculptor.htm
and Photomodeler:
www.photomodeler.com/
and uzr3d:
www.uzr.de/en/products.html
Yes, I have an interest in photogrammetry/image-based modeling ;)
One thing to remember is that while these tools are now capable of some pretty impressive results, you're not likely to get as optimal a result as you would from a talented artist.
#7
Here's my first model I made playing around with it, it looks pretty nice, but you can't save the textures in the demo, as far as I can tell.
www.desolation.org/images/playing-cards.jpg
The other option I thought of, was to use a 3D scanner. The cheapest I saw out there was around $1,300. Almost affordable, but again I think you would be better off spending the money on hiring a real artist, rather than making things out of clay. :)
03/12/2003 (6:51 am)
No kidding. I made a helmet mesh out of sculpy clay and 14 hours. When I got done, I was ready to kill myself along with as many innocents as I could take with me. Photomodeler is a pain in the arse tho, because they've yanked their demo off the internet. I was able to find an old copy off some dusty server in europe, using alltheweb.com however. Here's my first model I made playing around with it, it looks pretty nice, but you can't save the textures in the demo, as far as I can tell.
www.desolation.org/images/playing-cards.jpg
The other option I thought of, was to use a 3D scanner. The cheapest I saw out there was around $1,300. Almost affordable, but again I think you would be better off spending the money on hiring a real artist, rather than making things out of clay. :)
#8
The idea is that you have your object on a turntable, set on a calibration sheet. You rotate the turntable, take a snap, repeat until you have 12-30 pics. Then the software does its magic and you end up with a mesh and textures.
In theory, larger objects work too, you'd just probably be moving the camera instead of the model.
03/12/2003 (12:09 pm)
For anything other than boxy objects, I think the D Sculptor and uzr3d methods are probably the best.The idea is that you have your object on a turntable, set on a calibration sheet. You rotate the turntable, take a snap, repeat until you have 12-30 pics. Then the software does its magic and you end up with a mesh and textures.
In theory, larger objects work too, you'd just probably be moving the camera instead of the model.
#9
David
03/12/2003 (1:16 pm)
Yes, I have to agree that D Sculptor is simpler and provided better results (in my case) than photomodeller. And of course the usefullness of these products is limited since random objects in the computer room probably don't have a place in a game.... (Attack of the Candle Holder...) And if you are truly without any artistic ability, the most you can make out of a lump of clay is a small semi-round ball. But if you had plastic or die cast models of certain objects then it could save volumes of time. I was more interested in whether or not it was possible and what the results would be like. The thing I like about D Sculptor is that you can adjust the poly count of the mesh. Pretty handy.David
Torque Owner Roger Smith