Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Questions about the results #6

Open
YMX2022 opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 9 comments
Open

Questions about the results #6

YMX2022 opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 9 comments

Comments

@YMX2022
Copy link

YMX2022 commented Dec 19, 2024

Hi,
First of all, I appreciate the great work you have done.

However, I have some concerns about the generalizability of the proposed method. When I feed a pre-generated texture map extracted from a robust multi-view image generation pipeline into your model, I encounter issues. Specifically, I am trying to use your work to perform inpainting and refinement on an incomplete texture.
Unfortunately, the results are extremely poor and even corrupt the original UV-map, as shown in the attached figures. The first figure is the initial texture that I used as input, and the second figure is the texture generated by your model.
Could you please help me understand why this is happening? Is this the expected behavior, or is there something I might be doing wrong?
Thank you for your assistance. FYI, the prompt I used is "a beautiful LV leather bag."

image
image

@XinYu-Andy
Copy link
Member

XinYu-Andy commented Dec 19, 2024

Hi, thanks for your interest. However, I think there should be some bug in your inference. It is almost impossible for our model to corrupt the original incomplete UV map. Is the second figure the same view of the first figure?

@YMX2022
Copy link
Author

YMX2022 commented Dec 19, 2024

Yes, these are the two uv-maps(before and after).
before
after

@XinYu-Andy
Copy link
Member

What is your mask map?

@YMX2022
Copy link
Author

YMX2022 commented Dec 19, 2024

This is the uv mask. But I haven't use it in the inference, should I?
image

@XinYu-Andy
Copy link
Member

There are two mask maps you need to use. The first one is the UV mask (what you show above). The second one is processed in our code (this line), which bakes the already known texture while providing a mask indicating which pixels are known so the network will not change these regions.

@YMX2022
Copy link
Author

YMX2022 commented Dec 19, 2024

OK! I will test it again with the two masks. Thanks for your help.

@YMX2022
Copy link
Author

YMX2022 commented Dec 19, 2024

I have tested again according to your advice. This time, to better align the configuration, I also generate only the front view image for the model (and unwrap it into UV space as the initial texture) and let TEXGen complement all of the other texels in the UV map. Here are the results (Input and the Output).
image
image
Well, as you said, the existing part is not corruped this time.
However, I am still not pleased with the result (I assume there might be some domain gap between your training data with my testing data).
Thanks again for your help.

@XinYu-Andy
Copy link
Member

Thanks for your testing. I should admit that this case is challenging for current model version because it is trained on only 12w data from scratch. In this case, what we want to complete is the semantic pattern instead of low-level details such as wood strips, this is more difficult for this model. We are working on this and trying to develop a new model to do it better.

@YMX2022
Copy link
Author

YMX2022 commented Dec 20, 2024

Seems interesting. Looking forward to the new model!

@YMX2022 YMX2022 changed the title Bad results Questions about the results Dec 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants