|
|
|
|
|
by numpad0
1278 days ago
|
|
> The main problem with mesh generation from stuff like this is that usually the topology is a mess and needs a lot of cleanup to be useuable. It's not quite so bad for static non deforming objects but anything that needs to be animated deforming or that is organic looking would likely need retopologizing by hand.
>
> That's one of the worst parts of 3D modeling so it's like you're getting the AI to do the fun part and leaving you to do all the boring cleanup process. From [1]. Seems like there is a pattern of "AI asked to generate final results with only final results to learn from, immediately asked for the apple in the picture" in AI generators. I suppose lack of specialization in application domains of NNs is a deliberate design choice for these high-profile projects, in a vague hope of simulating emergent behaviors as seen in the nature and avoiding to be another expert system(while being one!), but that attitude seems limiting usefulness, here and again. |
|
People developing these models are very aware of what 3D workflow is like.
The issue is that image->point cloud training data is very easy to get, whereas image or point cloud -> clean 3d mesh training data is very hard to get in unconstrained domains.
Generating point clouds is where the state of the art is now. That doesn't mean that the whole field isn't entirely aware that text->3d mesh unlocks many more capabilities.