3 ms·
Depends on how you are going to use the result. This method is great for creating assets. Photogrammetry is already used a lot. The rule for a lot if 3D work
by tdudhhu 3y ago
Depends on how you are going to use the result.
This method is great for creating assets. Photogrammetry is already used a lot.
The rule for a lot if 3D work is: if it looks good, it is good.
But I agree this method won't be suitable for all 3D work.
- jsheard 3y agoPhotogrammetry requires a lot of manual cleanup and retopology work, but it's worth the trouble because it captures a lot of extremely fine detail which can be baked down into textures and applied to the manually refined model. It's not really clear to me that NeRFs are producing enough detail to warrant that cleanup effort, rather than modelling something from scratch. I would be interested to see a comparison of conventional SOTA photogrammetry pipelines versus NeRF techniques solving a 3D model from the same set of photos, but these papers only ever seem to compare themselves to other NeRF papers, rather than the software that the industry is already using to solve this exact problem.
- tdudhhu 3y agoWell again: if it looks good it is good. When you are not creating assets for games or close-up details it can still be very usefull to take a couple of pictures of a tree stump and use it in your environment.
- matt3D 3y agoAlso photogrammetry from an industry level. I work in construction, we take photos of the building in situ as a lot of the important elements are encased later (eg. Reinforcement inside concrete) This level of 3D NeRF is great for that as it's much easier to parse than a folder full of images.