I had also looked at 123D Catch but it looks like Autodesk has worked on this a lot since I first tried it. Autodesk has provided a vast assortment of modules and applications to provide an end-to-end 3D capture, design, sharing, and printing capability. Some of it like the social "facebook" sharing angle is fluff to me, but I recognize they are trying to monetize this effort.
I am more interested in this from the technical perspective to sample the state of the art currently in capturing a 3D model from photographs. Both Autodesk 123D Catch and VisualSFM likely use very similar algorithms to do this. VisualSFM has the advantage of being able to tweak the algorithm that does the feature tracking and run it locally (Autodesk requires that you transmit the photographs to their servers where the real number crunching is done). As such, VisualSFM has the advantage of seeing the algorithms working live.
Autodesk does seem to have a better capability of retaining the original colors and surface textures. Both however don't do a great job of capturing the lines and curves of the geometry of the Vader helmet. The dome especially given its lack of features and black/glossy surface can't be captured by either. It's like trying to extract features from the 2001 A Space Odyssey monolith. This could probably be accommodated by sprinkling powder or glitter (for example) on the surface to give the algorithms something to track and then edit those out later with another tool.
For both it seems to be a matter of trying to find exactly the optimum photographic setup that works with each application.
Here's a couple of quick captures I did of my DPDLX in 3 different setups using Autodesk 123D Catch:
1) Inside - this provided the best overall capture. I believe it picked up what could be some surface features obscured by paint, but also interspersed with artificial artifacts from the algorithm interpolating and "guessing":
2) Outside (direct sunlight) - Interesting in this is that it captured the "nose droop" (the downward angle at the tip of the nose) which is not how it was painted and not immediately visible but would be accurate according to how the original helmets were molded.
3) Outside (indirect diffuse sunlight) - This gave the worst results surprisingly, looking like Vader was just sent through an underpowered Star Trek transporter.