5 ms·
> there are practical applications for it right now I'm flat out skeptical you're not just waving your hands in the air vaguely. Provide concrete examples of
by wokwokwok 5y ago
> there are practical applications for it right now
I'm flat out skeptical you're not just waving your hands in the air vaguely.
Provide concrete examples of how it's used right now then, specifically in a scenario where traditional techniques don't work.
Not, "look at this youtube video that took 80 hours to render a 800x800 pixel image for our paper"; an actual practical application.
I've never seen NeRF deployed in anything other than a proof of concept or toy scenario.
- dTal 5y agoI just gave you one. You can now cheaply and rapidly capture dense lightfields of highly specular objects for VR display. Get yourself a camera array (100 cameras is not infeasible!) and you can capture them instantaneously. That's totally game changing compared to the current state of the art of scanning camera gantries (slow) or photogrammetry (fails on complex or highly specular geometry). If you're asking me for an example of it being publicly used in production, well I think you're asking a lot considering the technique is only a few months old.
- wokwokwok 5y ago> If you're asking me for an example of it being publicly used in production, well I think you're asking a lot considering the technique is only a few months old That is what I explicitly asked for. You’re failure to provide an example is not because it’s new it’s because it’s actually not useful practically at the moment. NeRF has been around since March 2020 (https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.08934); https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.08934); you are simply wrong; traditional techniques are better right now, have better implementations and are widely used. NeRF is a promising technology that is categorically worse in its current implementation and maturity. I don’t know what else to say.