A Tale of Two Models: Problems with Merging two 3D models together

This past week I made two models of every artifact that captures both sides of the models and built each model to be textured which is the last step in the process. I am still figuring out how to merge the models into one complete whole that leaves no gaps. There are a few different methods of alignment that I tried and so far I have had no luck with either. The goal moving forward is to find the best alignment method which should not take long to complete once I figure it out, but this will allow me to have complete models for each of the six artifacts that can then be printed.

                Also this past week I decided that the newer models I would create would have a lot more pictures in the profiles then I normally do. The other profiles had on average 50-80 pictures to create the model and I wanted to try capturing more pictures to see what type of difference that would make, so I captured 125 photos for one of the models which drastically increased the detail of the model I was working with but it took much longer to process. On average, to build the dense point cloud for the other models only took 2-5 minutes at the most, however, this conch shell that had 125 photos in it took almost an hour just to build the dense point cloud. Other steps in the process also took longer than normally. This created a scenario where I had to go work on something else while this processed, but I believe that it is worth the wait overall since the detail increased significantly. This is noticed just by looking at the sparse point cloud. Normally the outline of the object was suggested before, but the conch shell is already very prominent. Dense point clouds for all other models ranged between 1 to 1.6 million points while the Conch model had 3.4 million points which explains the processing time.

                This past week I printed a cylinder seal for Dr. Tiffany Spadoni and I also printed one for myself to use in a lesson on Mesopotamia for my 6^th grade classes. The ability to print artifacts like this off a cheap home printer has allowed me and will allow Dr. Spadoni to use these replicas as a teaching tool. I was able to show the students what a cylinder seal not only looks like but also how it works by demonstrating it on playdough. This is part of the benefit of the internship that I am working on, this allows a hands on approach to the past that not only interests students but creates a lasting impression of engagement.

Progress on plastic comparisons and the modelling process

This past week I have been crafting the 3D models based off of each artifact as well as cleaning and comparing the resin and plastic test prints. Over the next week I’ll be finishing some of the models and begin the printing process.

                The digital side of things each model has brought its own difficulties but none have so far proved too difficult. Many of the models need the assistance of playdough to remain upright so I can capture both sides, however this means I am not capturing the piece placed into the playdough. I have two choices; my first option is to leave the blank hole there and solidify the model in another program which would just fill the hole in and make it smooth, or my second option is to flip the model and capture the bottom side and then merge both models together to fill the hole. The second option is preferable but learning how to do this took up a larger portion of my time but I feel it will be worth it due to its accuracy. Additionally the glare on the sharpening tool was not as much of a problem as I anticipated as I could just turn down the lighting in my apartment and use more diffused lighting which allowed me to capture it without having random holes in it due to reflections.

                The plastic to resin comparison is following what I anticipated but new points have been brought to light as I broke the plastic models from their supports. Breaking the supports off of the model caused support marring on the models as anticipated that needs to be cleaned up more accurately either through sanding or with a fine edge tool, however some of the models were difficult to remove from their supports and I actually tore the arrow head into two pieces as I cracked the model cleanly along the layer line as I was trying to move the supports. The supports were fused to the model in some places and those touch points were stronger than the actual model itself. Additional support issues come from the wax seal and lock as there are many small little strands of plastic obscuring the detail that are a slow process to remove as well as the quality of the lock. The lock was printed on resin and FDM using the same digital model yet the plastic version has tiny holes and layer lines that seemed frayed and pulled out of position creating more holes.

Notice that some layers seem pulled out of position and some gaps become visible

This photo is similar to the one displayed last week. Notice that amount of thin strands that need to be cut and pulled off of the model's face. Additionally, the depth of each letter presents a visible difference

Overall, I would rather deal with the resin post processing any day because it is so much easier to not damage the model, preserve its detail, and faster to process. The plastic models, while they printed in a quarter of the time it took to print the resin models, the post processing is rather labor intensive and create a higher risk for damaging the replica. I should note, however, that I have a lot more experience with printing resin models than I do with FDM, especially because I do not place the supports on FDM nor do I control any of the other printing options and there may be ways to adapt the printing process to make the post processing more viable, less damaging, and less labor intensive.

Plastic Comparisons and Artifacts for Project

This past week I met up with Emma Dietrich from FPAN and talked about fixing the low-resolution problem I was having last week. Emma also brought the plastic replicas from the original test set so I could compare them to resin, as well as the actual artifacts that I will capture in 3D and print.

The plastic models were left on their support structure to help me better understand the post processing that goes into cleaning the models after they print while also having another aspect that I could compare between the two printing methods. Once I properly clean the support structures off I will be able to compare the two sets more fully, however initially the plastic prints look much better than I anticipated and do not bare strong layer lines which is traditionally associated with FDM prints. The plastic prints are also lighter and printed in a fourth of the time it takes to print their resin counter parts. While I will wait until I can compare them more fully next week, there was already an initial problem with the tip of the arrowhead pictured below. The plastic tip seems to be thinned, hallowed, and appears as if it isn’t complete. This could be a problem during the printing process, a limitation of FDM, or perhaps damage the model sustained after printing. Ill be sure to reach out to see if holding sharp points on FDM is normally an issue.

                I received six artifacts in total to preserve with two of them being purposefully selected to be more complex and difficult to capture and print. The first four models I will focus on are the easiest to capture and are three arrow heads and a fishing weight for a net. All are straightforward matte objects which will help me start this project off by working out any remaining kinks as I start from the beginning of the process and progress all the way to printing the model off and cleaning off support structures. The two other artifacts are a sharpening tool that has a slight gloss finish and a conch that was used as a hammer. The sharpening tool provides an additional challenge due to its gloss finish which reflects light back at the camera and creates blanks spots In the model as Metashape cannot place dots in these areas because it cannot detect what is supposed to be in that spot. The conch shell provides a challenge because of its overhang but also its size. A model like this will require support structures throughout the overhang and will overall require more care throughout the printing and post process.  

    I went ahead and started capturing one of the arrow heads and by the time of writing this blog I realized a mistake I made that I will go ahead and display here. So far the model looked great but I failed to take enough pictures on a particular side of the model and it left a dead space of data. This tells me that I need to go back and capture more photos from this angle to fix this problem. However, getting the model to this point did not take long at all due to the time I spent previously working in the program.

A Successful Test Run

 

One of difficulties of this internship is finding a time when two full-time workers can meet in a COVID-19 world. The story the past few weeks has been one of scheduling conflicts, whenever my supervisor was free to meet one night, I had an obligation for work and vice versa. Emma and myself have slotted another Face-to-Face meeting for Tuesday, October 13 where I can hopefully start the work on the deliverable part of the internship.

I have gotten a good grip on all the software and hardware used in this process from taking the photos to create the image profiles, to using Metashape to render the 3D model, then to Meshmixer to make the model watertight and solid, and finally to load it into a slicer and actually print the model and handle and cure it properly. I am confident that this process will not take long once I get the artifacts to print as the longest amount of time was figuring out how to use all these programs and hardware. Emma has also reassured me that the FDM test models were printed. A potential future problem could be the turn around time on the FDM prints for the five artifacts. I would have to complete each 3D render and send if off to FPAN for printing, then meet in person once again to exchange the artifacts and FDM replicas in time to start writing the conference paper so my goal is to have a quicker turnaround time after Tuesday’s meeting.

The final step in the 3D modelling process that I spent the last week working on was taking the fully rendered model in Metashape and exporting it into Meshmixer which is a free, basic, modelling platform. I previously mentioned Blender which is a free, yet highly advanced program but ditched the effort as it was overkill and difficult to understand with the time frame and scope of the project. From here I took the model and separated many of the stray islands of data found inside the hollow model and deleted them so only one single continuous model remained. Then, with Meshmixer, I was able to make the model solid and close any gaps or holes on the surface of the model. From here, I exported the model into the 3D printing slicers and the model was good to print.

I did not print this test model because I have printed hundreds of models at this stage to know how it will turn out physically so there is no need to waste the resin considering there was a problem with the resolution. the final product lacked a lot of detail on the surface which was disappointing and this problem could have a lot of causes which makes it difficult to pin down. Could this be a limitation of low-cost photogrammetry and an issue with the resolution of the images? Could this be a limitation of the model itself that I choose, being that it is at a 32mm scale with a lot of detail? Could this be a limitation of Meshmixer or the exporting process? Or could this problem stem from a small step that I missed, such as exporting the texture of the model separately and working with that? These questions will have to be answered when I work with the actual artifacts because this model I choose is a very small and complex figure with lots of thin pieces, fine details, and sharp edges.

This is the final, yet low-resolution model. Notice the lack of detail all around the model.

This is the actual model itself that I chose as a test model because of its small size yet high detail.

This was the model finished in Metashape which bears more resemblance to the original than to the printable version which is what gives me so many questions.

Overall, I am happy with this internship so far. The first half of it I spent learning the software and hardware associated with it and these skills can all directly translate as usable skills for what I want my thesis to be on which saves me the time in the future with figuring it all out. Many people outside the history department hear the project that I am doing and glaze over it as they do with any conversation relating to graduate research, however, when I show the three test prints I have done previously they light up and become interested and want to handle and touch the replicas. This internship, and the concept of replication as a whole makes me excited because it is taking the past and making it a tangible experience for some where the deliverable is a product that can be held in hand which has even brought smiles to a few faces.

 This past week I've spent moving and unpacking my apartment and tried my hand at photogrammetry once again to see if I could solve my previous problem. I tired a few different methods and built the models through the rendering processes and had different measures of success.

The first method I tried was the same one I used two weeks ago but without the turn table and I just turned the model by hand. This method failed once again as the cameras would not align properly which only ends up rendering half of the model. The reason for this failure is that there is a visible texture in the background of all of the photos because of photobox. 

The second method I used was the same as above put I moved the camera much closer to the model so nothing but the model and the immediate area around it was in frame. This way, not only would more detail be captured, but there would be no extra data or texture that would confuse the program. This method was a success and the cameras were actually aligned around the model meaning it was rendering three dimensionally.

Each blue square is where the program detects where my camera was when I took it in relation to the model.

From here I cleaned up any stray points in the sparse point cloud to make the dense point cloud cleaner with only the data I need, then I built the mesh which takes all the dense points and essentially connects them all which starts to turn the model into something that could be solid. I then did the last step and built the texture which brings all the definition onto the model. Since this model is just the test model as I wait for the artifacts, I did not spend too much time cleaning away all the white noise around the model. Cleaning this would make the model more defined and sharp but it takes some time to do as you have to go in by hand and delete away each segment without deleted the rest of the model it is attached to.

This is the rendered texture, the final step in Metashape.

This is a close up of the wireframe

The third method I did was to actually move around the model, yet with worse lighting. I decided it was worth doing still despite the success of the previous method so I can compare and decide which produces a better result. This method was a success and all of the cameras rendered in the correct area, however, it is clear that these cameras do not make a perfect circle or were taken from exactly the same height as I took each photo by hand as opposed to having a tripod. Despite this I was able to take a lot of photos from around the model and the results turned out really well. There was more work cleaning out the stray data such as part of my couch, TV, and desk. I completed the above mentioned steps to render the model and it came out with what appears to be a higher resolution because of the additionally photos I took. Overall, I will try physically moving around the model more often since it produced great results despite shaky hands, uneven photo heights etc.

These cameras are spaced unevenly and are at uneven heights because I took this by hand as I moved around the model.

This is the rendered texture for the method where I physically moved around the model.

The next step is to important these models in blender and fill in gaps and holes and make them printable on a 3D printer where I can even test print it out to see how accurate it was to the original. Hopefully within the next week or two I can start the work on the actual artifacts.  

Survey of the Field

 

This past week and a half I’ve been packing and moving to a new apartment in between my job and school and I could not get much actual progress done with photogrammetry or 3D printing and this week I was the one who was unable to meet with Emma Dietrich due to how a packing time crunch. As such I will use this week’s blog post to present a survey of the field where I will showcase other projects already out there as well as papers which relate to my research.

                First and foremost, the “Florida History in 3D” project is similar to what I hope to accomplish on a smaller scale. Creating models which serve as a digital online exhibit that show cases local Florida history is the real pull of this project and is a great way to present a collection of artifacts that share the same story.

http://floridahistoryin3d.com/

                “Scan the World” is large project which seeks to present the world’s heritage in a massive online database and takes a grass roots approach where anyone can capture important cultural heritage objects in 3D and add it to the database with the use of their phone camera, but this project is also supported by many museums who digitize their collections into the database creating a database that has over 16,000 objects. The idea behind this project is the bring cultural heritage to the people with entire collections available online and are all free to download and print off replicas with the use of a 3D printer. This project really inspires my own as it makes cultural heritage more accessible and opens up a lot of options for 3D replication, although this is not always feasible for more 1:1 replications due to size restrictions.

 https://www.myminifactory.com/scantheworld/

“Preserving Rapid Prototypes: A Review” is a great source for understanding the current replication processes in the professional field. It breaks down the differences between material type as well as applications, and the operations of different printers. This source also showcases many different projects which have used a variety of rapid protype replications and the benefits of each which makes this source a great advocate for the replication field especially with cultural heritage objects for public use.

Coon, Carolien. “Preserving rapid prototypes: A review.” Heritage Science 4, no. 40 (22 November 2016).

 

The source listed below is a great source for detailing the uses of photogrammetry in the archaeological field in the case for survey purposes which allows for an accurate recording of an object at a particular point in time to allow research without the need to travel back out to the site again. This source also details the process of capturing an object with photogrammetry in the field.

McCarthy, John. “Multi-image photogrammetry as a practical tool for cultural heritage survey and community engagement.” Journal of Archaeological Science 43 (2014).

 

The goal for the upcoming week is to unpack quickly and get back on track with completing the project.

A Brick Wall

 This past week does not bring any interesting photos of progress as this week was mainly a brick wall to my project which will be the focus of this blog post. This week was really busy for Emma Dietrich over at FPAN so we could not trouble shoot my problems together or exchange photos, prints, or artifacts.

With this known, my goal for this week was to fix a previous problem I had last week where I built the dense point cloud and the back half of the model was not there due to the program reading other spatial data within the photobox other than the model itself which tells it I am not moving around the model and thus confusing the program with conflicting spatial dots. There are a few solutions to this problem with the most prevalent being “masking.”

Masking is a feature where Metashape takes a single photo and identifies all the spatial data it can from the single photo and then ignores it every time it comes up in every photo in my selected profile. This works well on a turntable because it blocks out the static background so Metashape no longer has conflicting spatial data due to the turn table. I spent a good deal of time trying to get this process to work but only had marginal success. A unique feature to Metashape is its ability to automatically detect and apply masks across the whole profile based off of one image, however I later found out that the small rubber ridges on my turntable make it difficult for this process to work as intended. I had every photo masked yet the photos would no longer align (the first step in building the point cloud that eventually becomes the 3D model) which is why this week is a brick wall.

The black negative portions of each photo is the data that is ignored because it matches my fully masked static background. Note the white lines that are not the actual model that create the confusion during the aligning process.

Every problem I tried to solve brought me marginal success only to be stuck again with another, very similar, problem. I took three entirely new photo groups with different settings, and I tried masking in different methods just in case it was the original photo group that was the problem.

I have, however, pathways the circumvent this problem for the upcoming week. I can buy more lights and actually move around the model; this would be the most time-consuming method. I could also go through every single image in my photo groups and apply an individual custom mask to each photo, this method would be time consuming due to the volume of photos but perhaps not as much as moving around the model. The third way would be to apply white poster board to the top of the turn table to get rid of the texture and repeat the steps I took this week and if any problems occur, then I can edit the masks to touch up any areas that would be confusing for the program.

My goal for next week is to move past this problem and finally construct a full 3D model so I can start learning the process that makes that model printable with another program called blender.