3D model resolution isn’t good than still images.
But,It’s a good way to understand solids.
The new iphone have a TOF sencer.
The TOF sensor makes it easy to record 3D models.
I think that 3D recording will become common from now on.
Because , I think the medium you see will change to AR.
Of course, the still image does not disappear.
I think it coexists with the 3D model.
So,What do you think 3D model ?
Also, what do you think should be recorded with a 3D model ?
I think that it’s still going to be too expensive for users and to store lots of data like this – for now. In five or ten years, I can see such images becoming commonplace.
these kinds of models are neat, and i would definitely add a link to any associated models in the description of your observations. that said, i think these are somewhat niche. TOF cameras still tend to be found only on expensive flagship phones and not at all on digital cameras. iNaturalist hasn’t added support for things like video yet, and i would think video support should come before 3D model support, just because more people are likely to record video than 3D models, i think, even in the future.
I think this is a very interesting development, and like trh_blue, I have no doubt that this is only the beginning. Thank you for sharing your results.
I suspect until things speed up considerably, (and become available on cheap android devices) the value of these images will be first for producing a reference library. 3d images would be great for confirming an ID, as you can easily change angle or zoom in to details that maybe you can’t see on a 2d image. And, better still, they can be easily annotated to label all those horrible technical terms for plant parts that seem to change for every plant ID I attempt. Maybe even growth and development of the plant could be animated.
I don’t think that the world of botany is exactly swimming in cash, (I still use a flora with black and white line drawings) so I’m not sure who would invest money and time in my fantasy 3d flora.
Maybe the data from LIDAR gadgets will be useful in machine learning for automatic ID-ing.
I understand that photogrammetry (a cheap and widely available way of making 3d images just from photos) has been difficult with plants because you have to take a lot of photos, and the plants sway while you travel round the plant (and there are also issues with glossiness). Maybe this is less of an issue with this technology.
As an alternative to 3d imaging, I always thought that serious botanical 3d modelling was an art waiting to emerge (in the same way that botanical drawings have long been used to help identify plants).
But I think maybe the strength of 3d models is also a weakness; they appear to be real. As the models are constructed, they require decisions from the artist not only about form and colour, but also things like transluscence and texture. So if the artist makes the wrong decision, they are essentially reinventing the plant, which could be problematic if the end-user is using the 3d image not as a confirmation for ID, but as a primary source of knowledge. Maybe the way of avoiding confusion in the brain would be to make 3d models stylised or schematic (in the same way we know a drawing is drawing and not a photo).
Everything that we record video of now, playing fox cubs, dancing birds, running gazelles or flying insects. Plus videos instead of still shots from trail cameras, there’re so many great footages that are too big to be a gif.
@astra_the_dragon
Thank you.
I think so too :)
I’m looking forward to the day when 3D models become commonplace.
@pisum
I agree with you.
What do you think should be recorded in the video?
I think it makes sense to record the insects that visit the flowers.
And motion data caused by wind.
@lionelm
Thank you for your recomend.
I think your recommendation is an important point when thinking about 3D models in the future.
My 3D model is made by photogrammetry ( sorry to quote the TOF )
Yes , It’s difficult because you have to walk around.
Mathematical model is so inetresting.
I am also looking forward to the future you envision.
@fffffffff
Sorry , I forget about things other than plants XD
Yes , playing fox cubs, dancing birds, running gazelles or flying insects are all important.
@jasonhernandez74
Oh ! Timelaps is sooooooo goooooood !!!
Timelaps can see the different time that we can’t see with the eye.
3D models and videos are important too.
i think video is especially useful for anything that moves or changes appearance from different angles or produces sounds. animal movements are obvious candidates to be captured by video, but the way plants respond to animal visitors are also interesting. this could include carnivorous plants capturing insects, leaf movements of things like Mimosa plants, the way lupine flowers can be pushed down by larger bees to reveal an otherwise hidden nectar source, etc. the way organisms respond to the environment might also be interest. this could include the way plants move in the wind (as you noted), but it could also include the way seeds fall to the ground, the way plants or fungi respond to the rain (like the way birds nest fungus spores that get displaced by raindrops), etc. video (including 360 video) is also a great way to capture information about the environment. it can get a lot more information about what’s going on – including background sounds – than a picture or two.
Thank you for the concrete example.
I have already started recording the background sounds.
However, it is not recorded as a video.
I’ll try to record video.