Hi Dennis, I've used NextEngine for scanning fossils–from long bones to more complex structures like vertebrae. I find the resolution to be excellent for the cost and scan time. Some people find the merging/stitching function in the associated program ScanStudio to be not as precise as other programs, so what we do is export individual scans (i.e., scan = each time we move the specimen on the platform) and then merge and process them in GeoMagic. We have the basic setup for NextEngine, so the turntable is small which prohibits us from scanning large specimens. I'm not sure if NextEngine offers larger turntables.
My advisor and I also tested some hand-held surface scanners about 2 years ago (including the Zscanner http://www.zcorp.com/documents/175_ZScanner%20800%20Website.pdf), and we generally found more noise in the scans than we'd hoped. For example, fine teeth in a small dinosaur looked muddled. It's been two years since, so it is possible that the resolution and noise have been improved dramatically. But my impression 2 years ago was that the handheld scanners were not quite up to scientific standards. I hope this helps! Cheers, Aki On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:56 PM, dslice <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone have any experience or recommendations for a high-resolution, > table-top 3D scanner? > > I am wanting to apply for a university equipment grant to get a scanner > for my lab (and anyone else who might need to scan). This will be in > collaboration with bio and archaeological and art researchers. These grants > usually run about $40kUSD. > > It seems the popular NextEngine scanner (~6000USD with all the extras) has > a resolution of approx. 0.1-0.3mm. That would be fine for my stuff - method > development and human-sized bones, but my bio colleagues deem that > inadequate for their needs - mouse-sized bones. We can get high-res from > microCT, but that takes forever - about a day per scan and the files are > huge, e.g., >30GB. > > Similarly, the Artec Spider (22,600USD) has a resolution of 0.1 mm. It > promises some advantages of hand-held scanning, which would benefit my > archaeological colleagues, but I am hearing from users it might not be so > great in actual usage. Not sure if it supports a turntable/table-top > operation option. > > So, does anyone have any suggestions? > high-resolution > portable (might need to travel with it) > fast, easy table-top operation > <$40kUSD > > -ds > > -- > MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > -- Aki Watanabe Doctoral Candidate Division of Paleontology Richard Gilder Graduate School American Museum of Natural History Central Park West at 79th Street New York, NY 10024 website: https://sites.google.com/site/akinopteryx/ twitter: @akiopteryx Google Glass project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yh6R8rup58&list=PLrfcruGtplwHCoLvvxKq1Bq-XkbO3tclr -- MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
