2 ms·
Looks ok, albeit blurry. Would have been nice to see comparison of render-time between the neural and classical renderers.
by kookamamie 1y ago
Looks ok, albeit blurry. Would have been nice to see comparison of render-time between the neural and classical renderers.
- daemonologist 1y agoThere's some discussion of time in the paper; they compare to Blender Cycles (path tracing) and at least for their <= 4k triangle scenes the neural approach is much faster. I suspect it doesn't scale as well though (they mention their attention runtime is quadratic with number of tris). https://renderformer.github.io/pdfs/renderformer-paper.pdf https://renderformer.github.io/pdfs/renderformer-paper.pdf I wonder if it would be practical to use the neural approach (with simplified geometry) only for indirect lighting - use a conventional rasterizer and then glue the GI on top.
- kookamamie 1y agoYeah, but barely reaching PSNR 30 sounds like it "compresses" a lot of detail, too.
- nyanpasu64 1y agoThe animations (specifically Animated Crab and Robot Animation) have quite noticeable AI art artifacts that swirl around the model in unnatural ways as the objects and camera move.
- kookamamie 1y agoYes, the typical AI stuff is visible in the examples, which are surely cherry-picked to a degree.