|
|
|
|
|
|
by wsve
702 days ago
|
|
|
"face scan" doesn't imply "3d face scan", it just implies additional data beyond a regular photograph. Isn't a 3d scan just a bunch of 2d scans lumped together? How many photos need to be taken before it's okay to call it a "scan"? |
|
|
I think that's actually a really interesting question.
To me, intuitively, it's pretty clear that if you took 100 photos of someone's head being rotated 1° each time, to put together a model of their face, that's a scan.
It's also clear that, intuitively, just 2 photos, or even 4 photos at 25° each, is not a scan. They're just a few individual photos.
All of which feels pretty analogous to, how many pixels does a bitmap need in both dimensions to call it a photo?
A 4x4 bitmap is not a photo. While a 100x100 bitmap certainly is, even if we'd call it thumbnail size. But we'd all agree it's a photo.
So where's the transition? I'd suggest a value of 20 is kind of a gray area threshold. A 20x20 image maybe you can say is starting to turn into a photo. Similarly, a collection of 20 images taken at regularly spaced angles maybe you can say is starting to turn into a 3D scan.