MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
bostinnovation.com
MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
1–10 of 13 posts
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#2I wish HN had a "wow" button. Simply upvoting a submission like this one seems... inadequate.
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#3Inside sources say that it will be called Nitendo 3DS
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#4I wish HN had a "wow" button. Simply upvoting a submission like this one seems... inadequate.
Context: GelSight can register “physical features less than a micrometer in depth and about two micrometers across,” which means it can create a 3D image of ink on a piece of paper (below):
Below that there is a 3D image of ink on a piece of paper. Taken with a handheld device. "Wow" about covers it, although I might go with "WOW."
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#5[deleted]
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#6The computer vision part might be related to polynomial texture mapping: http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/ptm/
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#7I wonder how easy a cheap, low tech version of this would be to make. A camera staring at the underside of a clear gel with an incredibly thin layer of opaque reflective pigment on top of it could pick up and translate a depth map if the surface were evenly lit.
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#8I wish HN had a "wow" button. Simply upvoting a submission like this one seems... inadequate.
That's an awesome idea. Perhaps it could kick in at a karma level.
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#9I don't understand how this works. Little help hn!
Re: MIT develops a portable, high-resolution 3D imaging solution
#10"When the metallic side is pressed against the surface of an object, the rubber deforms slightly"
while the concept is great, it still doesn't maximize precision (for high resolution analysis), since the pressure can also deform your object of interest. ideally, you would want to use a metallic as less viscous as possible to keep the surfaces rigid.