2019
DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.14136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resolving Reflection and Resolution in 3D Imaging of Fresh Bone

Abstract: Structured light scanning is a noninvasive, accurate, and cost‐effective 3D imaging technique, but due to reflection issues is yet to be utilized for tool mark analysis on fresh bone. During imaging, reflection from shiny surfaces, such as greasy bone, disrupts image formation. This study tested the David SLS‐1 scanner's ability to image saw marks and explored six strategies to reduce reflection by [1] dulling the surface or [2] altering the projected light. The surface was dulled by freezing, talcum powder, d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 8 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To evaluate the reliability of the 3D scanning system that we developed, we compared the CSA estimated using the vision-based method with CSA estimated based on 3D models, which is schematically shown in Figure 3. Moreover, we compared the results of vision-based measurements and those obtained via reconstructed 3D models with repeated measurements of fascicle bundles with additional anti-reflective talc coating [41]. The calculated CSA and relative error for CSA measurement of uncoated samples are presented in Table 3.…”
Section: Tissue Samples: Comparison Between the Vision-based Methods Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To evaluate the reliability of the 3D scanning system that we developed, we compared the CSA estimated using the vision-based method with CSA estimated based on 3D models, which is schematically shown in Figure 3. Moreover, we compared the results of vision-based measurements and those obtained via reconstructed 3D models with repeated measurements of fascicle bundles with additional anti-reflective talc coating [41]. The calculated CSA and relative error for CSA measurement of uncoated samples are presented in Table 3.…”
Section: Tissue Samples: Comparison Between the Vision-based Methods Amentioning
confidence: 99%