On 10/3/2016 06:40 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
>> Hello rpml-brain. I wish I had a scanner for small (<10cm) things
>> at high (.1mm) accuracy, but I don't have much (<$1000) budget.
>> Convex only is OK, I can do without undercuts, but accuracy is
>> important: .5mm won't do.
>
> Depending on how much you're willing to hack: optical scanners are
> scalable. Put a macro lens in front of the camera, move the camera
> closer to the object and the resolution should raise. At the cost of
> scan field size, of course.
Perhaps...but the amount I'm willing to hack is a big ol' zero. It
would cut into my design time, and what are the odds I'll find something
that 1000 better hackers have looked for, and not found at a cheap
price? Very low.
>> PS yeah it would be really nice if messages on this list had the
>> list address somewhere.
>
> It does now! For this message I simply clicked on "Reply" and it's
> addressed to rp-ml. Excellent! :-)
Yes, this is way better!
-Bathsheba
--
Bathsheba Grossman Bathsheba Sculpture LLC
http://bathsheba.com Free Forms
http://crystalprotein.com Crystal Proteins
Received on Tue Oct 04 2016 - 02:07:55 EEST