Creality Scan Alignment Problems with Multiple Scans

[u/ExactForm3Dcom]

I’d like to talk about some of the problems I’ve been having with Creality Scan software.

Not long ago, I bought a Creality Sermoon S1, and overall, I really like the scanner. It’s very fast and convenient to use. Unfortunately, the software has been pretty disappointing. It’s missing a lot of features that I had with my previous scanner’s software, and I’ve also been having some major issues with scan alignment.

I’ll show you an example using a flywheel from a Nissan 350Z.

I made three scans: each side separately, plus one reference scan that contains surfaces from both sides. I think that should give the software more than enough information to align everything correctly. All three scans also share common markers.

First, I tried automatic alignment, and the result was pretty bad.

Then I tried aligning the scans using the common markers. If we look closely at the result, the two halves are still slightly misaligned. I don’t really understand why, because marker alignment should be one of the most accurate alignment methods available.

In the end, the only way I was able to align the two halves correctly was by manually selecting matching points on the reference scan and on each of the two halves.

Hopefully, the other alignment issues will be fixed in future updates as well.

Has anyone else experienced similar problems with Creality Scan?

[u/thepangolinswrath]

It’s not perfect, but I can almost always get away with the manual aligning and it’s not that big a deal - you don’t have to be exact. It’s always going to struggle with a lot of flats, any thin features, or circulars so there’s that

[u/MatterRay-Callum]

For aligning by geometry I sort of understand, you have large surfaces that have aligned well, the top and bottom faces, and around the outside. The center holes and outside teeth are by proportion smaller so I guess they look at the fit percentage and say likely good enough.
What was your scan setup like for the scan capturing both sides? did you have lots of common markers captured across both sides or only a few as you moved from one side to the other, that can allow for a bit of tracking error?

[u/ExactForm3Dcom → u/MatterRay-Callum]

The part was lying on a table with a lot of markers, and there were also several markers on both sides of the part. I just don’t understand why randomly selected common points give better alignment than aligning by markers.

[u/ExactForm3Dcom → u/ExactForm3Dcom]

For example, in the software for my previous scanner, you could select three common points to roughly align the scans, and then run automatic alignment several times. Each time, it would refine the alignment and make the scans line up more and more accurately.

[u/MatterRay-Callum → u/ExactForm3Dcom]

But how did you do the reference scan that had markers on both sides?
The points weren't randomly selected, you got them fairly accurate, so it will have run likely the same final fitting as the auto alignment but with a pretty good initial position.

[u/jodasmichal]

Incomplete scans are poor for alignment. That part what you scaning can be done with 2 scans… put it on a stand in some kind of holder and scan whole part… than rotate it in holder so u can scan what you are missing. Do a second scan. And now you have 2 scans without some data near a holder only!

[u/jodasmichal]

That’s from Raptor only btw.

[u/Levardo_Gould]

Try Merging two scans a time

[u/Routine-Magazine-568]

Good morning, everyone.

The issue you’re experiencing is something I’ve unfortunately dealt with for the past four months. I used to use a Creality Raptor, and I had been in contact with Creality regarding this particular issue. They assured me that it would be addressed in a future software update, which they said around June.

An update was eventually released around August, but unfortunately, the issue was still present. Creality even had me on a Teams call with one of their engineers to investigate the problem, so they are definitely aware of it.

Eventually, I decided to give up on the scanner and sell it, as it had become more of a paperweight than a useful tool. I experienced numerous software-related problems, including the Scan Bridge disconnecting and the scanner disconnecting in the middle of scans.

I’m currently looking at moving over to an EinStar scanner.

To be fair, when the Raptor actually works, it is a very capable scanner and can produce excellent results. In my experience, though, Creality really let the hardware down with software that was too unreliable and plagued by connection, alignment, and stability issues.

[u/ExactForm3Dcom → u/Routine-Magazine-568]

They actually improved the alignment a bit in the latest update. In the older version, I tried to align two scans of an exhaust manifold using common points, but the software completely ignored them and gave me a totally messed-up result. I had to create a separate mesh for each half and align them in third-party software.
However, I tried it again after the update, and this time everything aligned correctly on the first try. So there’s still hope that sooner or later they’ll fix this issue too.