OrcaM is new kid on block for 3-D data capture

Jan 21, 2012 by Nancy Owano report

(PhysOrg.com) -- Call it automated photograph station, seven-camera system, 3-D model showcase, or digital reconstruction tool. OrcaM is being described as all these things. Whatever the tag, the "OrcaM" name stands for Orbital Camera System, according to its Germany-based developers NEK GmbH. A video demo was making the rounds of web gadget blogs and news sites this week as a camera system to watch.

The OrcaM system involves a large sphere, likened by one viewer as a giant maw, inside which one places the desired object for 3-D scanning. Once the object is placed inside, the sphere is sealed shut and the seven cameras and lights go to work. The cameras take simultaneous photos of the object at different angles. Serving to define the object's , various combinations of lights illuminate the object differently for every shot, capturing the finest details. After the photo processing, of the image creates the 3-D model. Observers say the end result is a highly impressive agreement of the real object.

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.

According to the web site I Programmer, which assessed the video, the wire frame model used 20,000 triangles based on 300 million measured points "accurate to less than a millimeter." The camera system, said the report, is worth the look when accuracy is paramount.

A camera system of this size and scope may seem easily destined for the confines of powerhouse R&D labs in the sciences, but OrcaM is also generating interest in how it is being promoted.

Developers of the camera system are identified as NEK. According to the company, “Within the range equipment construction we developed and finished an automated photograph station (OrcaM) for digital visualizations and reconstructions of objects.”

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
OrcaM Reconstruction Sequences

The system is also identified on the DFKI site as having been developed "in the context of a project" of the Augmented Vision arm of DFKI, which stands for Germany's Research Center for Artificial Intelligence.

NEK sees the as a way to conduct automated transfers of real objects into high-quality digital representations for media such as on the "Internet, cinema, and computer games." The DFKI envisions its application being to create super-accurate models of museum and art objects, models that are good enough to be used instead of the originals. The 3-D models produced by OrcaM are said to be fully textured and of high enough quality for the archives of valuable artifacts from museums.

A useful selling point for both the above two applications is that, with the OrcaM system, key tasks are automatic. The user does not have to calibrate the cameras or lighting system, which the system performs automatically.

Explore further: Engineers tap gaming technology to improve design

More information: www.nek-kl.de/de_DE/produkte/o… bital-camera-system/

Related Stories

Creating 3D models with a simple webcam (w/ Video)

Nov 11, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- Constructing virtual 3D models usually requires heavy and expensive equipment, or takes lengthy amounts of time. A group of researchers at the University of Cambridge, Qi Pan, Dr Gerhard Reitmayr ...

Laser-based camera can see around corners

Nov 17, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- Researchers from MIT have developed a camera that can capture images of a scene that is not in its direct line of sight. The camera is equipped with a femtosecond laser, which fires extremely ...

Nikon DSLRs can give eye-opening results

Feb 27, 2009

I am no camera buff. I bought my first digital camera only three years ago, and I often prefer to use the 2-megapixel camera in my iPhone than carry around another gadget.

Augmented reality in an iPhone app

Jun 20, 2011

Imagine you’re in a museum, and you can point your iPhone camera to a painting or an object in an exhibit and instantly get additional information about what you’re looking at. This is what PixLive, ...

2-D photos spring to 3-D life

Jun 16, 2011

You’re interested in purchasing a car you’ve seen on the web. It’s the right make, model and vintage. It seems to be in great shape, and it’s just the right color. The price seems reasonable. So what’s ...

Recommended for you

User comments : 19

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (3) Jan 21, 2012
According to the web site I Programmer, which assessed the video, the wire frame model used 20,000 triangles based on 300 million measured points "accurate to less than a millimeter."

Ummm..I hate to tell you this but submilimeter accuracy was state-of-the-art 10 years ago (scanning accuracy today goes down to 0.025mm..well actually that was in 2003).

And 20 000 triangles is far, FAR from stellar. MIT does scans regularly with tens of millions of triangles at that accuracy.
Telekinetic
1.7 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2012
Can you imagine the quantum camera? You could ditch the cumbersome sphere first off, and miniaturize it so it becomes a palm-sized consumer item. Megapixels would be infinipixels.
trekgeek1
5 / 5 (3) Jan 21, 2012
Can you imagine the quantum camera? You could ditch the cumbersome sphere first off, and miniaturize it so it becomes a palm-sized consumer item. Megapixels would be infinipixels.


There are a finite number of particles in the universe. You could never have an infinite number of pixels.
Callippo
3 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2012
It seems, this device could be used for teleportation too - just after some minor adjustments...
Telekinetic
2 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2012
Can you imagine the quantum camera? You could ditch the cumbersome sphere first off, and miniaturize it so it becomes a palm-sized consumer item. Megapixels would be infinipixels.


There are a finite number of particles in the universe. You could never have an infinite number of pixels.

Is a pixel a particle, and are we talking about only one universe?
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
5 / 5 (1) Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

You need something to represent a bit in an information system, let alone a pixel which is a structure comprising multiple pieces of information (position, colour, etc). A limited number of particles in the universe does set an upper limit on the number of - well everything really, including pixels. And yes, at the risk of being unbearably mundane, let's only assume one universe for now, shall we?
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
5 / 5 (1) Jan 21, 2012
@Callippo

Minor adjustments? Minor in the sense of constructing a completely different machine, operating in the context of a completely different set of principles to accomplish a completely different objective? If so they yes, quite 'minor'. We should be able to pick one up on Ebay second hand this time next year.
Telekinetic
2.6 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2012
" And yes, at the risk of being unbearably mundane, let's only assume one universe for now, shall we?"- Fedup

No can do. It's not your father's physics anymore.
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
5 / 5 (1) Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

You're right, it's not. For the sake of argument let's assume there are an infinite number of universes. In order to take advantage of all those universe's particles your device would have to harness them somehow. The device would have to include them, or otherwise make allowances for an interface to them and would thus be infinitely large. It could not be a 'palm-sized consumer item'. Bearing that in mind, for the purposes of constructing a real device let's assume one universe for now, shall we?
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2012
The only things finite, Fed Up, is your imagination and your sense of humor. Again, the answer is no.
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
5 / 5 (3) Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

I'll grant that both of those are finite, though I fail to see how personal attacks on me contribute in any meaningful way. If I've offended you, then I apologize. You're still wrong though.
Telekinetic
1.3 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2012
Callippo was being facetious in response to my far-flung prediction, and I was being tongue-in-cheek about the expectations of consumerism. Now that I've ruined the "joke" by having to explain it to you, why don't you just go run outside and play. And since you're relatively new to the PhysOrg forum, personal attacks are as common as punctuation.
bullsballs
not rated yet Jan 21, 2012
there is Infinite Wisdom, which most are not privy...
trekgeek1
not rated yet Jan 21, 2012
" And yes, at the risk of being unbearably mundane, let's only assume one universe for now, shall we?"- Fedup

No can do. It's not your father's physics anymore.


Even multiple universes would not help. If you have a finite number of universes and each contains a finite number of items, you can never have infinite pixels since the last time I checked, infinite was slightly greater than finite.
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2012
And last time I checked, the "multiverse" predicts an infinite number of universes.
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
not rated yet Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

..and I was being tongue-in-cheek about the expectations of consumerism.


Oh I see, you weren't serious then! It was all a lark! I'll do you the favour of assuming that your continued (and continuing) defense of the bad idea via the concept of multiple universes was also part of the merry gag. Oh dear, I do feel foolish!

As for my commenting on your usage of personal attacks. My only intention was to point out how pathetic your ability was to defend your ideas using logic and reason. If you have to resort to attacks against my character, well...
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

You're right, it's not. For the sake of argument let's assume there are an infinite number of universes. In order to take advantage of all those universe's particles your device would have to harness them somehow. The device would have to include them, or otherwise make allowances for an interface to them and would thus be infinitely large. It could not be a 'palm-sized consumer item'. Bearing that in mind, for the purposes of constructing a real device let's assume one universe for now, shall we?

You begin your invitation, how?, that there are an infinite number of universes. We have to harness all of these particles, as you say. Then, you say it's impossible unless you've created an interface of some sort which would be infinitely large, as you claim. The creation of a quantum device is to get smaller, and theoretically, you will. Clumsily, you repeat once again, in order to make a real device, let's assume one universe for now. How would you know if it works?
Telekinetic
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2012
@Telekinetic

..and I was being tongue-in-cheek about the expectations of consumerism.


Oh I see, you weren't serious then! It was all a lark! I'll do you the favour of assuming that your continued (and continuing) defense of the bad idea via the concept of multiple universes was also part of the merry gag. Oh dear, I do feel foolish!

As for my commenting on your usage of personal attacks. My only intention was to point out how pathetic your ability was to defend your ideas using logic and reason. If you have to resort to attacks against my character, well...

I will parry with anyone who challenges me. If I draw information, rather than a sword to refute my challenger, I make sure it's straight, true, and hits its mark.
vmircea
not rated yet Jan 22, 2012
This device can scan a object in 360 degree?
or is like the others devices that can scan only on 180 degree... I don't think this device can be used for industrial design, and so for me is useless...