[Paper Review] 3D Scanning: A Comprehensive Survey

Morteza Daneshmand, Ahmed M. Helmi+8 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|Jan 24, 2018

3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage109 references48 citations

TL;DR

This paper surveys 3D scanning methodologies and technologies, comparing close-range photogrammetry, aerial photogrammetry, laser scanning, time-of-flight, structured-light, and SFM, and discusses post-processing steps like outlier removal and surface fitting.

ABSTRACT

This paper provides an overview of 3D scanning methodologies and technologies proposed in the existing scientific and industrial literature. Throughout the paper, various types of the related techniques are reviewed, which consist, mainly, of close-range, aerial, structure-from-motion and terrestrial photogrammetry, and mobile, terrestrial and airborne laser scanning, as well as time-of-flight, structured-light and phase-comparison methods, along with comparative and combinational studies, the latter being intended to help make a clearer distinction on the relevance and reliability of the possible choices. Moreover, outlier detection and surface fitting procedures are discussed concisely, which are necessary post-processing stages.

Motivation & Objective

• Provide a state-of-the-art overview of 3D scanning technologies used in photogrammetry, remote sensing, and computer vision.
• Classify and compare major 3D scanning approaches (close-range, aerial, MLS, TLS, TOF, structured-light, phase-based) and their typical use cases.
• Highlight post-processing steps such as outlier detection and surface fitting, and identify challenges and benchmarks for testing algorithms.

Proposed method

• Review and synthesize literature on CRP, aerial, SFM, and terrestrial photogrammetry, LS (mobile, terrestrial, airborne), TOF, structured-light, and phase-comparison methods.
• Discuss comparative and combinational studies to clarify applicability and reliability of methods.
• Summarize post-processing procedures including outlier detection and surface fitting.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 What are the dominant 3D scanning technologies and their relative advantages and limitations?
• RQ2 How do photogrammetry, LiDAR, and SFM compare in accuracy, speed, and cost across different scenarios (on-ground, aerial, mobile)?
• RQ3 What post-processing steps are essential for reliable 3D surface reconstruction in these pipelines?
• RQ4 In which applications (heritage, forestry, coastal monitoring, urban modeling) do specific methods perform best or face challenges?

Key findings

• UAV photogrammetry and SFM can yield dense 3D point clouds with competitive accuracy and lower cost compared to some LiDAR approaches in certain contexts.
• Photogrammetry-based methods often provide dense reconstructions and are enhanced when combined with multi-view imagery and oblique views, with examples achieving sub-mm to cm-level detail in various studies.
• TLS and MLS offer high-accuracy scans for detailed topography and heritage monitoring but may incur higher costs and processing demands, with trade-offs against speed and coverage.
• There is evidence of cost savings and increased efficiency in UAV-based approaches, but calibration, ground control distribution, and image orientation remain critical for accuracy.
• Photogrammetric and LiDAR-based approaches are complemented by robust post-processing steps such as outlier detection and surface fitting to ensure reliable surfaces.