Open xiaoxiae opened 7 months ago
Doing more experiments, I couldn't replicate this issue. Running the full reconstruction (sparse, dense, model, texture) for varying --resolution-level
s decreased the time... I'll see if I can pin the issue down further.
first of all you are not using the same input, you should make the experiemnt with changing only resolution level and nothiing else
second, all command line paths are relative to the working folder, no need to set full path for any argument, except the working folder; your command are very hard to parse and read
The input data is the same, that was the point of the issue. The reconstruction was, however, ran twice, so the vertices/faces are slightly different.
I'll close the issue for now, will reopen when I have some more concrete examples.
what do u mean by the same if the first is
Mesh loaded: 218075 vertices, 436005 faces
and the second is
Mesh loaded: 196957 vertices, 393774 faces
The input data is the same (exactly same images). The reconstruction was then ran and so the meshes produced differ slightly. It was therefore strange that the differences in texturing were as large as I mentioned.
@cdcseacave just ran into the issue again, this time with the same input data (attached below).
It seems that --resolution-level 0
and --resolution-level 1
generate entirely different texture atlases, with the one with 0
being good (only 186 patches) whereas the one with 1
being really bad (~28000 patches; producing a large amount of untextured triangles).
This is very unintuitive since the packing theoretically shouldn't rely on this parameter (at least from my understanding).
input.zip
output.zip (produced with TextureMesh -i scene.mvs --mesh-file scene_dense_mesh.ply --resolution-level 0
and --resolution-level 1
respectively)
Describe the bug The texturing of a mesh takes significantly more time when using a resolution level that is higher than zero (done to reduce memory consumption for larger scenes).
Resolution level
0
:Resolution level
3
:This is very likely due to the fact that there are
71
patches in the resolution0
and89266
in resolution3
, which is strange since the code should arguably behave in the same way.Is there something I'm missing?