October 23, 2015 at 8:24 pm #4975
I wanted to ask a question if anybody of you guys is using the SKYN Concept?
I share the article on my dropbox here –>
In a nutshell the concept is -> Prep teeth > take impression of existing “beautiful” anterior teeth (google Anteriores templates) > make thin like composite shells to put over the preps > PreOP Scan the shells on the teeth > scan the prep > Use the clone option to create “natural like shaped teeth”.
Now I’m wondering if the Clone feature would work the same way as in CEREC’s Correlation feature? As I see it, but I don’t have so much experience with CEREC since I’ve only used it in another office where I worked, the correlation feature works somewhat differently?
Any ideas? Would this concept make sense with E4D?October 23, 2015 at 9:52 pm #9903
You can clone temps for your design, pretty easy to do. Generally I’ll do a dx wax, pre-op scan the wax up and use it to clone. Works pretty well. You will have some work to do getting the proximal contacts and embrasures designed, but the basic shape of the teeth will be there.
Hope that answers your question, that drop box link wasn’t working.October 23, 2015 at 10:03 pm #9904
Mike, I’m doing the same thing with wax up, sometimes did them myself, however once I use clone feature, almost all the details are gone, especially when adjusting and “smoothing” the surface I loose all the good information. This is what I’m referring to, to keep as much natural information as possible into the cloning.
Maybe also see this link: https://www.facebook.com/NeocliniquePro/videos/458987167638734/October 23, 2015 at 10:50 pm #9905
I have used CEREC corelation with omnicam extensively , it is the same thing as planscan clone and there is zero difference. The planscan does just as good at copying the waxup details compared to Omnicam corelation. furthermore neither the cerec mill or the planmill can mill that kind of detail like imbercation lines and surface texture.. If you listen carefully they add that by hand polishing and hand doing surface texturing and they are the top 1% in the world at doing it. Trust me, both mills will get you 85% there the last 15% is done by hand and takes some people a lifetime to master. We should all wish to do that kind of work, and I applaud it, but it is the human element that makes the difference. It would be nice to have a database of perfect anteriors in our library with super detail and surface character or the ability to make our own libraries but then again the mills can’t replicate it, especially not a 3axis or 4 axis mill.October 23, 2015 at 10:53 pm #9906
Thanks for clearing that up Wally 🙂 I’ll add that wish to the wish list post haha, creating our own libraries!October 23, 2015 at 11:00 pm #9907
Like here case I did. nice clone and details but not realized with the mill.October 24, 2015 at 12:22 am #9908
Wally’s go it, mill has limits. I did the smile design course last year, learned lots of techniques for adding back those little details that make a big difference in the anterior. Not super hard to learn, If I can do it anyone can. Not sure any mill can really replicate all that fine detail, maybe somewhere down the line.October 24, 2015 at 4:14 pm #9909
Well I was wondering why they then would go through all the process of creating the shells before, if the Correlation/Clone wouldn’t really replicate the surface characteristics, scanning the wax-up/pre OP probably saves a little time in designing but I’m not sure, the anterior libraries are pretty good I think.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.