6 ms·
On the calibration side, would it be possible to use fiducial markers (even a single Aruco) on the print bed to make an ortho projection of the print? You have
by joshvm 4y ago
On the calibration side, would it be possible to use fiducial markers (even a single Aruco) on the print bed to make an ortho projection of the print? You have the issue of print rotation relative to the bed, but I don't think there's an easy way around that if you allow removable beds. My gut feeling is that stereo would work but it'd be a pain to make reliable. ToF using something like a Kinect or RealSense might work at a coarse level (few mm).
- grepLeigh 4y agoI did try inferring depth distance from strategically-placed round colored stickers. Using 1 fixed camera, I didn't see noteworthy results until I cranked up the resolution to 1080+ with FP64 inputs. I used a UNET architecture with skip connections between 1/4th, 1/8th, and 1/16th resolution samples. Diagrams here: https://photos.app.goo.gl/xLmE9Xp7UYmekBwV6 https://photos.app.goo.gl/xLmE9Xp7UYmekBwV6 Keep in mind that PrintNanny's video encoding and neural network pipelines are running on-device, so real-world results favor models that perform well when u8 quantized at 320p resolution. The constraints are part of the fun, but there is a bias towards techniques that retain signal when the model is compressed. Segmentation and depth models naturally lose fidelity in that scenario compared to a dead-simple CNN/SSD pumping out bounding box proposals.