You really can't exprect to achieve a good scan if you use your phone and free software. Its the same with anything, if your are gonna be cheap you are going to get a cheap result. Nothing wrong with that but it does not reflect what you get if you put some time and money into it. Photogrammetry is the only proper way to achive good photorealism in a scene without going through unnecessary hassle. I would recommend exporting a lowpoly scan with a maybe 512x512 texture for an asset like this. Don't know what you are using this for but this is the type of prop that people don't really pay attention to so it is fine to reduce its detail. Most details in scans come from textures btw, so these 100k+ poly models don't do much but slow down your computer. Have a nice day and good luck on your journey!! :)
LiDAR scanning film and TV sets and making them usable meshes is my job, highly enjoyable skill to learn tbh. And just good day to day work that given the fact the subjects are set and are always different. One that never really gets boring. 👍
Thanks! Yeah I mean it depends on what you're using it for and how much geometry you can try and trim. I think the next step is to use this data to generate normal maps and textures, and mapping that to a hand made reconstruction using proper geometry.
I would remodel it with shrikwrap modifier with clean topology and then bake a normal map. Model the chains along a curve, Then texture the whole thing from there.. I wouldn’t just use the scan for performance and visual fidelity reasons. Scans are trash
You can remesh this in blender w quad remesher…. (Best add on Iv ever bought). However scans never remesh right. I’m guessing it’s because the dense trash topology and usually there’s a couple of faces that aren’t even closed…. Just tiny holes… All those dense, weird angle, and missing faces throws off the remesh tools. If it was me, I’d just retopologize it myself w a shrinkwrap modifier, bake a normal map, then retexture it myself..
I think most objects would be better off being modeled. Texture and detail are both pros of a 3d scan so really I think 3D scanning has a benefit of you're not good at texturing moreso than if you're not good at modeling.
Traditional photoscanning needs a solid surface with details. It doesn't work on blank surfaces, reflections or transparent materials. It also doesn't do a good job with lots of thin objects or overlapping parts (chain-link fences, leaves of a plant etc).
Exactly what Gbtx6 said. This is a garbage scan. Something that can be used as a step in the process but FAR from usable unless you're doing an indie project and this is all you got for a simple scene.
>day 23 of modelling things
>doesn’t model anything
Haha my thoughts exactly
Dude i didnt know your house was an entire neighborhood!
This is not modelling this is 3d scanning and this is not you house this is in the street
So u didnt modeled it then?
You really can't exprect to achieve a good scan if you use your phone and free software. Its the same with anything, if your are gonna be cheap you are going to get a cheap result. Nothing wrong with that but it does not reflect what you get if you put some time and money into it. Photogrammetry is the only proper way to achive good photorealism in a scene without going through unnecessary hassle. I would recommend exporting a lowpoly scan with a maybe 512x512 texture for an asset like this. Don't know what you are using this for but this is the type of prop that people don't really pay attention to so it is fine to reduce its detail. Most details in scans come from textures btw, so these 100k+ poly models don't do much but slow down your computer. Have a nice day and good luck on your journey!! :)
Great insight from a pro. This is just a daily journey to learn new things. The assets aren't used for anything 😅
LiDAR scanning film and TV sets and making them usable meshes is my job, highly enjoyable skill to learn tbh. And just good day to day work that given the fact the subjects are set and are always different. One that never really gets boring. 👍
Dude, I had no idea. I thought photo scans were great! Thanks for the perspective! Keep up the great work man! You’re killing it.🎉
Thanks! Yeah I mean it depends on what you're using it for and how much geometry you can try and trim. I think the next step is to use this data to generate normal maps and textures, and mapping that to a hand made reconstruction using proper geometry.
I would remodel it with shrikwrap modifier with clean topology and then bake a normal map. Model the chains along a curve, Then texture the whole thing from there.. I wouldn’t just use the scan for performance and visual fidelity reasons. Scans are trash
Hell yeah
Would it not be possible to remesh this? Usually C4D remesher gives good results/okay topology...
You can remesh this in blender w quad remesher…. (Best add on Iv ever bought). However scans never remesh right. I’m guessing it’s because the dense trash topology and usually there’s a couple of faces that aren’t even closed…. Just tiny holes…
All those dense, weird angle, and missing faces throws off the remesh tools.
If it was me, I’d just retopologize it myself w a shrinkwrap modifier, bake a normal map, then retexture it myself..
Trying to retopo 3D scans can be so hellish and tedious. It's doable, but it heavily depends on the shapes that make up your object.
Yeah that's been my experience so far too
So u just took a couple pictures, nice i guess
That’s not modeling…you just 3d scanned it
Chill out
This can be used for background props tho. Right?
It's just very high poly
I would not use this app for background props. That would increase the poly count by a enormous amount. Not without heavy modification.
You could've just took a pictire of it and it would've been the same.
Nice! Are there any objects you wouldn't recommend trying to 3D scan and to just model by hand?
I think most objects would be better off being modeled. Texture and detail are both pros of a 3d scan so really I think 3D scanning has a benefit of you're not good at texturing moreso than if you're not good at modeling.
But also anything transparent or reflective break 3d scanning so those must be done by hand
@@moboxgraphics Thanks for the explination!
Traditional photoscanning needs a solid surface with details. It doesn't work on blank surfaces, reflections or transparent materials.
It also doesn't do a good job with lots of thin objects or overlapping parts (chain-link fences, leaves of a plant etc).
Yo I love your channel 👌
That's pretty neat. I mean the topo is bad af but who cares. We are not AAA and have no bugdet 😂
Is this considered good topo ?
hell no. This is literally unusable for most things. If this is all you got, then for a simple thing it works.
Exactly what Gbtx6 said. This is a garbage scan. Something that can be used as a step in the process but FAR from usable unless you're doing an indie project and this is all you got for a simple scene.
I think you failed at both tasks. You didn’t model anything and it wasn’t even around your house 😂
That's not modeling bro, do better
Chill out