new potential scanner comparison process
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 201
- Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 6:50 pm
- 10
- Full Name: Arash Yaghoubi
- Company Details: Hypsometric
- Company Position Title: Director of Cartography
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Been thanked: 3 times
new potential scanner comparison process
I realized recently that we can now compare scanning quality quantitatively...bc we have great software for extracting pipe... Clearedge3d BIM suite... it would be easy to do... but we would need good spot with various size and color pipe at varying distances (1-40m)... as well as and most of the manufacturers present and an adjustable height tripod... maybe something for a future spar or white paper.
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:49 pm
- 11
- Full Name: Thad Wester
- Company Details: Clarity Scanning
- Company Position Title: President
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: SC
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
I don't see why the manufacturers would every participate in something like this. To much to risk!
You would just need a volunteer, or maybe when you rented a scanner for a project - do a scan with it and save it to compare down the road...
I'm sure we could coordinate that through the forum tho.
You would just need a volunteer, or maybe when you rented a scanner for a project - do a scan with it and save it to compare down the road...
I'm sure we could coordinate that through the forum tho.
- Formula1982
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:02 pm
- 8
- Full Name: Stephen Ferrari
- Company Details: UTEC StarNet Geomatics
- Company Position Title: Technical Lead
- Country: United Kingdom
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 13 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
It would need to be an independent group...like this forum.tbwester wrote:I don't see why the manufacturers would every participate in something like this. To much to risk!
You would just need a volunteer, or maybe when you rented a scanner for a project - do a scan with it and save it to compare down the road...
I'm sure we could coordinate that through the forum tho.
Set up a standard test method, let multiple people independently put each bit of kit through the same test, and collate the results. That would give us a method of comparing scanner A to scanner B.
- Jason Warren
- Administrator
- Posts: 4217
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:21 am
- 16
- Full Name: Jason Warren
- Company Details: Laser Scanning Forum Ltd
- Company Position Title: Co-Founder
- Country: UK
- Skype Name: jason_warren
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Location: Retford, UK
- Has thanked: 439 times
- Been thanked: 241 times
- Contact:
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
Sounds interesting... what comparison information would you like to see?
Jason Warren
Co_Founder
Dedicated to 3D Laser Scanning
LaserScanningForum
Co_Founder
Dedicated to 3D Laser Scanning
LaserScanningForum
-
- Honorary Member
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:31 pm
- 15
- Full Name: Matthew McCarter
- Company Details: Costain
- Company Position Title: BIM Manager
- Country: England
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
Good in theory, but in reality other factors influence buyers decisions than just quality of scan data from one location.
Quality of data is certainly an important part of a scanner, but here are just a few other things that come to mind quickly.
As others have said, you might get 1 or 2 vendors to agree to an independent test but the results would soon be ignored by vendors due to it not looking at the whole solution, just one part of it.
-What is the field process required?
-B/W Targets
-Spheres
- Setup over Survey point
- ability to create new scanner location in the field from BS/FS observations
-How good is the registered point cloud?
-How good is onboard noise filtering?
-How good/appropriate is software based filtering?
-How well does the registration software integrate with my desired downstream workflows?
-Does the software add any additional value by creating other outputs when needed?
-Meshes, orthophotos etc
-How flexible are work flows?
- Can I choose multiple ways of working in the field?
Quality of data is certainly an important part of a scanner, but here are just a few other things that come to mind quickly.
As others have said, you might get 1 or 2 vendors to agree to an independent test but the results would soon be ignored by vendors due to it not looking at the whole solution, just one part of it.
-What is the field process required?
-B/W Targets
-Spheres
- Setup over Survey point
- ability to create new scanner location in the field from BS/FS observations
-How good is the registered point cloud?
-How good is onboard noise filtering?
-How good/appropriate is software based filtering?
-How well does the registration software integrate with my desired downstream workflows?
-Does the software add any additional value by creating other outputs when needed?
-Meshes, orthophotos etc
-How flexible are work flows?
- Can I choose multiple ways of working in the field?
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:48 pm
- 8
- Full Name: Bruce Yager
- Company Details: Rikore Geomatics
- Company Position Title: Department Head
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
As a firm that heavily invests time in R & D, we have ran our scanners through many tests. I agree that the tests need to be done looking at all items, traverse functions, etc. Pricing needs to be included. Every scanner has its pros and cons, and more often than not, buyers look at price. Accuracy to me it a very big issue. If I run ten scans by traverse and know the beginning and ending coordinates, how accurate did the scanner do? Different types of projects need different types of approaches. I would suggest outdoor, indoor industrial and office, these types of scan projects. But for a true test comparing apples to apples, the same test facility for all scanners. Same computer to process. Scanners should be tested on the different scan resolutions.
I suggest a few of the forum readers get together and put a test together that we agree on that would best compare the scanners. Just a thought. This could give help to those looking at getting into scanning and even us veterans.
I suggest a few of the forum readers get together and put a test together that we agree on that would best compare the scanners. Just a thought. This could give help to those looking at getting into scanning and even us veterans.
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:04 pm
- 14
- Full Name: SAttaya
- Company Details: Sev1Tech
- Company Position Title: Sr Software Analyst-RemoteSensingEngr
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 127 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
For this to have any long term value,Rikore wrote:... Same computer to process. ...
can not be a condition.same computer to process
No guarantee that the exact computer system will be available.
The exact specific configuration of the computer used to process the data is necessary:
* mfg (or "built from compnents)
* CPU(s) (very specific - Intel Xeon E5-1680 V4, maybe configuration (forced use of 1(or2) 4.0 cores)
* memory (amount and speed)
* data disk (manufacturer and model, (all SSDs are not equal, right?), RAID status, etc)
* graphics (intel onboard (ugh), Nvidia M4000, M4000M, GTX 1080, (ie, gamer .vs. "professional")
* whatever I forgot
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 353
- Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:48 pm
- 8
- Full Name: Bruce Yager
- Company Details: Rikore Geomatics
- Company Position Title: Department Head
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
Steve,
I am thinking one central place and computer for the testing to be apples to apples. I don't think having different sites and conditions would give even results. I know this could be an involved process, but could be done. Just curious if others are interested in seeing such results.
I am thinking one central place and computer for the testing to be apples to apples. I don't think having different sites and conditions would give even results. I know this could be an involved process, but could be done. Just curious if others are interested in seeing such results.
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 642
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:13 pm
- 15
- Full Name: James Rye
- Company Details: Merrett Survey Partnership
- Company Position Title: Spatial Analyst
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 69 times
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
I remember that back in the day, this document was influential in our decision making process.
http://archive.cyark.org/temp/hcuhambur ... al2007.pdf
I would love to see this document updated
To summarise, the document provided:
Accuracy tests of distance measurements in comparison to a reference plane
Accuracy tests of inclination compensation
Influence of the laser beams angle of incidence on 3D accuracy
Investigations into scanning noise
Investigations into the influence of object colour
http://archive.cyark.org/temp/hcuhambur ... al2007.pdf
I would love to see this document updated
To summarise, the document provided:
Accuracy tests of distance measurements in comparison to a reference plane
Accuracy tests of inclination compensation
Influence of the laser beams angle of incidence on 3D accuracy
Investigations into scanning noise
Investigations into the influence of object colour
- Jason Warren
- Administrator
- Posts: 4217
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:21 am
- 16
- Full Name: Jason Warren
- Company Details: Laser Scanning Forum Ltd
- Company Position Title: Co-Founder
- Country: UK
- Skype Name: jason_warren
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Location: Retford, UK
- Has thanked: 439 times
- Been thanked: 241 times
- Contact:
Re: new potential scanner comparison process
LSF has one of these if it helps...
Related PDF Doc
http://hds.leica-geosystems.com/hds/en/ ... _Paper.pdf
Related PDF Doc
http://hds.leica-geosystems.com/hds/en/ ... _Paper.pdf
Jason Warren
Co_Founder
Dedicated to 3D Laser Scanning
LaserScanningForum
Co_Founder
Dedicated to 3D Laser Scanning
LaserScanningForum