3DMakerpro: Moose vs. Mole

We used common scanning objects for comparison.

This email was sent

April 19, 2024 9:00am EDT

Is this your brand on Milled? Claim it.

Matte tone:

Check out the new Moose!

It’s an impressive upgrade, and the early bird discount is only available for 9 more days.

SHOP MOOSE >

Early Bird Offer: March 28-April 28

Moose vs. Mole

To understand the improvements of Moose over Mole, we used common scanning objects for comparison. Each object was scanned only once, without editing, using the same point cloud fusion parameters.

First object: Athletic Shoes

Shoes are common scanning objects, but complex fabrics and dark-colored shoes challenge the point cloud algorithm and scanner resolution.

-The red parts are black areas. Mole struggles to scan these areas and often produces noise after scanning. Moose, on the other hand, can accurately scan the black parts, resulting in a very clean point cloud.

-When facing complex mesh surfaces, Moose demonstrates the advantage of AI processing. Each grid on the shoe mesh is arranged very regularly, clean and exquisite.

Second object: Metal Parts

Parts are precision scanning objects that test the scanner’s accuracy and scanning range.

-Moose’s accuracy error is ≤0.01mm, while Mole’s is ≈0.02mm, .
-Moose’s 100mm scan depth can scan deeper into the object, making it easier to scan the complete structure of the object.

Third object: Human Hand (self-scanned)

The human hand is a complex-angle scanning object that tests the scanner’s tracking ability and point cloud fusion algorithm.

-Thanks to the blue light system, Moose is less affected by shallow transparent objects and can correctly form the point cloud of the fingernails.

-Moose’s 0.07mm resolution can make the wrinkles at the finger joints clearly visible.

-When facing complex-angle objects, Moose’s AI Tracking plays a key role again, ensuring that complex camera movement paths do not lose tracking and can scan multiple angles in one go without pausing.