Attached Link: http://www.photomodeler.com/index14.html

the only problem is that you need a digital camera you can't use jpeg or any other graphic's format

yeah you can...with that special mode. I forget what it's called. The "lite" version is for downlod on the site. It was pretty cool if i remember from the last time i used it.

I ordered the demo and will let you know what I find in it...

Not too long ago, there was a full version of it being offered in maybe 3D World or Digit. Came on the CD with the mag. I'll have to check it out. From what I read of it that I remember, You have to have the object you want to model set up with a special "grid" (for lack of a better description) that was used for reference points for the program to be able to interprit the images. To me,personal opinion here, it seemed more trouble than what it was worth. The example the magazine used was that of a tiger or leopard and the finished image was no all that impressive.

i got a copy of D Sculptor 1.0 on the June 02 issue of Computer Arts....and it boasts the same thing....making a model from photos...it is still very frustrating...have to take like 16 photos (can scan photos from normal camera) of the object at different angles (around it like on the x-z axis)but keeping the camera in exactly the same angle on the y axis....so without a stand its impossible!...then if u get the pics ok u have to trace around the object in the program but even that was very awkward as the general layout of the program sucked.... so overall just model the objects yourself!...if the detail on the object is so great u can't model it just remember the photos probably won't show the detail required for the program to work it out....

Thanks for the assist, Wolf. That's exactly what I was trying to get at, but just couldn't pinpoint it.

Wolf, A stand with a clinometer on it(for measuring the angles.) It is a nice idea but as you soon discover it's too much work for the results you are likely to get. Someone like Zhann with expertise in both art and science might benefit with patience and trial and error (and a brunton compass) but most likely not. if it were to trace the outlines of the buildings along the lines of a magic wand it might work better but even then ... still It could be useful...can't entirely rule it out. - TJ

I once saw a 3d scanner wich could be used to make 3d models out of small objects. It wasn't that expensive. But the problem was that the scanning laser couldn't reach all the places. So not all the models turned out that good.

Have the same CD that Wolf is talking about and had a digital camera and the CD came with the circle with divisions on it that you could print it out. So I sat down to figure out what I would need to use it: 1. Camera stand with adjustable height and angle (You would just have to set it at the right height to set the camera at right angles to the object, then the camera would not need to be moved again) 2. Lazy susan to set the circle (and object) on, and could mark the surface that the lazy susan sat on so the marks would line up properly as you turned the lazy susan 16 times. 3. The patience to do all of that drawing around the outlines. The article in the magazine that described how it worked admitted that the results were iffy, because it only worked on the OUTLINE of the object. Details like a hole drilled through the object would get lost. The only real thing that was cool about it to me (and the only reason I considered trying it) was that the program would take all the photos after you traced the outline and combine them into a single uv map for the object. But the lighting had to be near perfect or that wouldn't look right either. There are devices out there that can make it very easy to scan objects into your computer, but they cost several thousand bucks (that I ain't got to spend on a hobby). In the end, I just decided to download free objects, use Poser, or make booleans in Bryce for objects.

Hey guys, that's the wrong software. Photomodeler can create an object from just one or two photos. All you do is assign corresponding points on the photos and it figures out the rest and maps the textures from the photo onto the new 3d objects. Think of it like color coded push-pins. Canoma used to work the same way. Download the lite version from the site and see what you can get.

just like any other software it has to take baby steps i hope this modeling program will become more user friendly so i think we should put this on the back burnner let it simmer you never know one day we may be using it on a regularly. what we need here is section lets call it SOFTWARE WATCH were there would be a list of software that we would watch for progress.in development.

madmax: Do you have a quick link?

tjohn the link is in the first post by Zhann. I like it so far even though I just did a simple children's blocks model. But it exported with the textures mapped in .3ds format and imported into Bryce perfectly, just had to add bump maps. I'll try it on a more complicated model some time and see if it's worth the pain. :) The pro version has more features but is $800 USD, the lite is free.

OK guys, I just posted the link, I didn't create the application, and haven't gotten the CD yet...lighten up...:P Zhann

Uh, sorry everyone, short attention span. By the time I read to the bottom I had forgotten the name of the product in the original post. (Slinks away to hide under rock)

Important thing is to get good reference photos (the clearer the better). It would have helped me if I would have thought of marking the edge points on the toy before taking the picture so I could see them better. A lot of the points I'm just guessing at and if they don't match to well between photos you can get big errors in point placement on the model. Overall I'd say even guessing it's coming out good. I picked this toy because it had well defined edges. There are curve tool and such in photomodeler but haven't tried my hand at it yet.

I recommend this for anyone who either isn't good at modeling or doesn't have a model program and want to model some real life things. (furnature, chairs, cars, etc)

Looks ok so far, Aldaron, did you download the app or is it on CD? I didn't remember seeing a download link...hmmmm, guess I need to take a look.....How long to do the toy? I was hoping it would be faster than starting a model from scratch...

Attached Link: http://www.photomodeler.com/demo01.html

Aldaron, something like that and a 'lazy susan' might work! - you wouldn't need to move the camera either. with camera on tripod = just put the toy on top of the susan and: snap! turn susan! snap! - TJ

For an object like that Aldaron, maybe photos that showed top, bottom, and side views with the camera set up in relation to the object so that the pics were like you were looking at the object in Bryce orthographic view screens would be easier then to trace the outlines and line up your points? Just a wild guess, really, just thinking of my class in making blueprint drawings I took before I changed my major from Engineering to Biology. You could hang the object on the wall to take photos for top and bottom views, for example.

This program doesn't require that the camera be at the same angle for all pictures. When you setup the project you tell it all the info on your camera (focal length, res size, etc) and it does calculations from there. This was only a test so I don't have a bottom view though I could easily add it later. You don't really want dead on face shots, though you do want each picture to be 90 degrees to the previous one. Basically to calculate where a point is it needs to be marked on two photos. The more points on more photos the more accurate the point location will be (basically it triangulates the points position). The reason it's so hard with this toy is 1. the picture is very low res (you can zoom way in to place points so you aren't working with small pictures) 2. the ship is all one color and hard to see where the edges and corners are.

Oh and that work so far is about 2 hours woth of work. As you get used to it and know which points to reference from photo to photo it should get a bit faster. For those that model you may be able to do it faster than this if you are good at modeling but I must say this is very accurate. The important thing is to plan ahead. You can take a lot of pictures but you don't need to use them all. Simple objects really only require 2-3 photos.

Attached Link: http://www.photomodeler.com/Lite/_dl/index.htm

I had the lite version. Didn't like it much. There's some expensive software out there that does this but it still isn't as good as building your own model. One of the advantages of photomodeling is being able to do specialized work like calculating skid mark distance, etc, for accident reconstruction. Most of the photomodelers let you place points on the image and build polygon surfaces. That's neat, but a good modeler will let you do that too. Just load your top, side, front view and build away.