h a l f b a k e r yIs it soup yet?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Object is placed inside scanning booth. Object is 3d-scanned to create surface topology.
Surface topology is used to construct flat virtual net of object surface with appropriate cuts / gaps. Some objects may require more than one separate piece to create a complete surface coverage.
Subject is
loaded through any number of ways - place subject in scanning booth to create 360° view, or upload photograph(s) or artwork from a library or database of designs.
Subject image is projected onto virtual net.
Net is printed in colour on thin membrane with self-adhesive backing
Net is unpeeled from backing and applied to surface of object.
Bump Mapping
https://en.wikipedi...g/wiki/Bump_mapping
[xenzag, Sep 13 2020]
[link]
|
| |
Ignoring phenomenology, what is the relationship between
subject and object? |
|
| |
The subject is an exemplar; the object is to be covered in the generated wrap, so as to imitate the appearance of the subject. |
|
| |
e.g. subject is can of beer; object is coffee mug. Beer can is scanned and wrap is printed with imitation of beer can. Wrap is applied to coffee mug. Coffee mug now looks like beer can. |
|
| |
// Coffee mug now looks like beer can // |
|
| |
The reverse process - disguising a beer can as a coffee mug - offers superior benefits to the beer-drinking end user. |
|
| |
Process can be used in any direction from any subject to any object. Hence title "universal..." |
|
| |
Presumably size isn't important ? |
|
| |
I am reminded of the story about high-fidelity record
players in "Godel, Escher, Bach". Just as a record-
player cannot reproduce a record-player-breaking
sound, this proposed machine presumably cannot
reproduce certain shapes or colors, therefore it is
not truly "universal". |
|
| |
Doesn't say it produces an accurate facsimile of the subject. |
|
| |
Suggest something that it could not do |
|
| |
Scanning an object is only one possible way to generate the "subject" file. The idea suggests photography as another option. The function of the device is not to scan things but to wrap them. I see no reason why the device should not be able to wrap itself. |
|
| |
To clarify, [+] although this device cannot accurately
wrap many things, including: Hairy Cat Ears, the Sun,
the entirety of the Universe. |
|
| |
Actually, it's going to run into problems with any object exhibiting fractal characteristics, like a coastline, since as a coastline has effectively an infinite perimeter the system will require and infinite amount of material to wrap it. |
|
| |
Oh c'mon. Admit it. You guys are still trying to passively train [Treon]. |
|
| |
Not to pick nits or anything but where peeling involves
taking something apart isn't unpeeling the same as
putting the thing back together? |
|
| |
//Transform//
spelling: disguise |
|
| |
No substance to anything, just a deflecting dance from a straining network of vertices. |
|
| |
Oh, well, if you're not going to take it seriously... |
|
| |
That much is blatantly obvious. |
|
| |
This is called "bump mapping" and most 3D software packages can deliver it via linking with a 3D scanner. |
|
| |
I've often wondered and asked with no satisfactory answers, if it's
possible to 3D print a möbius loop. |
|
| |
Yes, it is - as long as it isn't of zero - or negative* - thickness. |
|
| |
But if you then want the surface polished, that takes an infinitely long time ... |
|
| |
*Requires exotic matter; ask your supplier for price and delivery information. |
|
| |
[8th] it's that zero thickness that worries me. at the crossover. |
|
| |
Just turn it the other way up ... |
|
| |
You could print each side separately and then glue the two sides together back-to-back |
|
| |
It would be easier if you glued them front to front, as the fronts are more easily accessible; less reaching ... |
|
| |
That would be stupid because then you would only see the rough, unfinished sides. |
|
| |
Yes, but you'll have saved manufacturing costs; the customer can do the finishing. |
|
| |