toy - scan data to solid workflows? Rebuild geometry etc

[thoreaubakker]

m

Hi Everyone.

 I’m hoping to make foam sculptures out of XPs pink / blue foam, and have been working for days, trying to figure out a good strategy to turn scan data into a workable solid.

Initially, I took good  orthographic  photographs and tried to rebuild the geometry from canvases. That was OK but missed a lot of the subtle detail here (organic bevels etc).

My friend helped me to scan this, and I’ve been looking at videos on various techniques, including using a discontinued Autodesk product to turn triangles into quads so I could then turn it into a t-spline body.

might anyone have any tips on possible workflows? I swear I’ve been looking  half dozen options, But would love to hear from people with experience.

[thoreaubakker]

p.s.

I know there are tons of 'mesh to solid' type posts already on the forums, but the remake solution seems dead now (with Remake being retired), and there are so many ways to skin a cat, I'm looking for the best one!

Hoping to keep the geometry boxy, but get those nice organic bevels still.

[PaulMunford]

My understanding is the Re-Make isn't dead - it's just been rolled into Re-Cap.

However, Re-Make will only mesh photometric scans. Re-Cap will only mesh 'Structured' scans (Scans done from a tripod). 

As far as I am aware, Autodesk don't have a solution for taking the output from a hand scanner and meshing it (Although, there may be something in the Delcam solutions?).

I'd also like to know what methods have been tried and found to work well 🙂

Paul

[nstevelmans]

Hi,

Take a look at this 2  video's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHQHKWbyAK8&list=PLiqAcgpHECcfuerPOczIvwktMXdXrX8Bk&index=33

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F01N6zZOdo&list=PLiqAcgpHECcfuerPOczIvwktMXdXrX8Bk&t=56s&index=28

[TrippyLighting]

Looking at your screenshot of the scan it can be seen that the surface structure is relatively uneven and bumpy or wavy and these bumps are are in a size range similar to some of the designed features of the object you scanned.

These semi automatic re-meshers such as recap, instant meshes, etc. cannot really discern between these inadvertent bumps und actual model features and as such these bumps will end up in the resulting mesh.

Some of the features are relatively small in respect to the overall size of the scan. If you want to retain these feaurres you’ll end up with a very dense quad mesh that will likely be too dense to be modified with the T-Spline modeling tools in Fusion 360.

Before trying to re-mesh this object, make sure you repair any mesh defects, such as holes, so a Re-Mesher can create a closed mesh. Meshmixer is a good tool do fix such things. Then when you import it into Fusion 360 and convert it into a T-Spline and finally into a BRep it will be a solid body, not just a surface.

[thoreaubakker]

hey Gentlemen,

thank you so very much for your helpful links and insights.

@PaulMunford - regarding Remake I believe you're absolutely right. The solution of converting triangle mesh to quad mesh in remake is something I've come across a lot over the last couple days, so perhaps I should see if that functionality has been brought over to Re-Cap.

@nstevelmans - thanks for the great links! The one link you posted is titled 'Remake', and as mentioned above, that program has been assimilated into Re-Cap. Can you confirm the functions have been included in the new program? Very good videos, thanks!

@TrippyLighting - thanks for the tips. You know, you're absolutely right about the surface. It is pretty bumpy, and I'm not very happy with it. Below I've attached two screen shots. One is a t-spline body, created after I managed to get the mesh to 10 000 quads and bring it in (last night, via Zremesher in Zbrush), and the other is a simple boxy solid I've been working on seperately.

The scan / import is too bumpy for my taste, but my own model misses too much of the original. Do you have any good links or experience rebuilding geometry? I've see a good video with snapping t-splines to a mesh with 'pull', but I haven't been able to figure out how to apply that technique with multiple sides.

A friend was showing me in SpaceClaim, how he can create a plane (flat) and snap it to the angle of the mesh by choosing a few points / triangulating). I'm sure that can be done in Fusion360, but haven't come across it yet. (perhaps I  haven't searched hard enough)

t. 

p.s. love the Fusion 360 forums!

[TrippyLighting]

---

@thoreaubakker wrote:

A friend was showing me in SpaceClaim, how he can create a plane (flat) and snap it to the angle of the mesh by choosing a few points / triangulating). I'm sure that can be done in Fusion360, but haven't come across it yet. (perhaps I  haven't searched hard enough)

---

Nope, not even close. In the area of reverse engineering Spaceclaim is the leading software and is far superior ... with a price tag to match.

If you can attach the scan to your next post, I believe the approach to re-model this with surfaces and solids in Fusion 360 should be quite feasible given it is such a prismatic shape.

For more organic shapes it pays to really learn how to re-topologize. It pays to have good Sub-D modeling skills.

Software to do that with is Topogun, or The Blender plugin Retopoflow. Neither of those are free, but for what they are doing they are cheap.

[thoreaubakker]

@TrippyLighting

Wow, thanks for the helpful info. I think an educational license of SpaceClaim (I'm in art school now) is affordable. Maybe I'll look at adding that to my tool kit.

In the meantime, I'm working on this head all day. If you (or anyone!) feels like helping, I'd be grateful.

Right now I'm experimenting with:

1. creating sketches / boxes / extruding beveling and / or

2. trying to rebuild it with t-splines (not so confident on this technique)

The scan (60mb) is attached here. It's of a 1984 Voltron mold (Blue Lion), and has a broken ear.

Scanned on a Next Engine.

t.

[TrippyLighting]

You know, that approach in your second screenshot is not bad at all!

One piece of advice though, I would try to rough/block out a model with the timeline turned off.  There is really no good reason to keep the timeline when you're pushing around surfaces and edges and it'll keep the model much lighter. Most of the rounded edges you can do later either using normal or variable radius fillets, or if you're adventurous you can try to work with surfaces in patch mode.

You can always keep the mesh around as a visual reference.

[thoreaubakker]

@TrippyLighting

Thanks for the tip on turning off timeline. I've been working for hours and it is a little clunky!
Good call on the fillets too. Close to that point so it's good timing.

t.