Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

clad.you

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#31

Post by qrobit »

chiph wrote: post #28

Twenty or so years ago, Levis had a program called Personal Pair (they paired with a firm/product called Intellifit) where you would step into a millimeter wave 3D scanner and get your precise measurements. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1IceHjADbQ Which you could use to get a custom pair of jeans made just for you. This failed partly because the target market turned out to be middle-aged adults (that buy fewer pai…

There should still be privacy concerns, especially with their demo which sends a POST on "Generate". The author suggests the model is 85kB of weights, which could run perfectly well in browser.

> But with this software - the tolerances are looser, so the clothing becomes more manufacturable.

Does it? How do looser measurements help? I assume manufacturer would always take the upper bound of dimensions. Suppose model also predicted your dimensions are higher then they really are, so these two in combination give you an oversized piece of clothing.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#32

Post by chiph »

qrobit wrote: post #31
chiph wrote: post #28

Twenty or so years ago, Levis had a program called Personal Pair (they paired with a firm/product called Intellifit) where you would step into a millimeter wave 3D scanner and get your precise measurements. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1IceHjADbQ Which you could use to get a custom pair of jeans made just for you. This failed partly because the target market turned out to be middle-aged adults (that buy fewer pai…

There should still be privacy concerns, especially with their demo which sends a POST on "Generate". The author suggests the model is 85kB of weights, which could run perfectly well in browser. > But with this software - the tolerances are looser, so the clothing becomes more manufacturable. Does it? How do looser measurements help? I assume manufacturer would always take the upper bound of dimensions. Suppose model…

Not just oversized - undersized also happens. Most cloth is still cut by hand using large electric saws and it's just not that accurate. (caution: loud music)

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jvQHvz4GlPQ

Notice that the panels are marked out with chalk and if the operator doesn't stay square to the table, or isn't diligent in marking up the panels, they won't be consistent with the brand's standard sizing.

I mean - ideally a set of panels of a piece of clothing would be cut by computerized laser so it's accurate to what the buyer needs. But that costs too much and takes too long.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#33

Post by sorenjan »

gwerbin wrote: post #19
sorenjan wrote: post #15

I don't understand why the height and weight errors aren't 0 when they are known inputs? If I say how tall I am, why is the model estimating something else?

That's a common phenomenon in model fitting, depending on the type of model. In both old school regression and neural networks, the fitted model does not distinguish between specific training examples and other inputs. So specific input-output pairs from the training data don't get special privilege. In fact it's often a good thing that models don't just memorize inputt-output pairs from training, because that allows…

Yes, but why are they estimating the features when they are already available? They can estimate the other measurements from height etc, and just use the known inputs as is. I don't get the point of passing them through a model at all.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#34

Post by anuramat »

beng-nl wrote: post #29
anuramat wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs don't read so it's ok to say "SSD read/write speed", but now that we have something closer to the original meaning of the word, someone always has to point out that "LLMs don't have a soul" (or whatever you think is required for it to count as akchyually reading) do storage devices have souls?

If I can just stand up for the nitpicker - arguably in the uncanny valley it’s more natural to point out it’s not reading (by their definition) than outside it (ssd’s).

makes sense in a philosophical debate or when you're talking to your confused grandparents, but does anyone on hn not know how LLMs work, at least on the level of "tokens, matrices, data, sgd"?

otherwise, that reminder must imply that people do know how it works, and yet they still ascribe to these models some property like qualia, i.e. something other than "being able to turn english into code and compute into shareholder value";

but then if you disagree, why even mention it in the first place? do atheists randomly proclaim "btw god isn't real!" in unrelated conversations with strangers of unknown religious beliefs?

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#35

Post by fuzzythinker »

wholinator2 wrote: post #24
endofreach wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ai;dr Haven't seen that one yet. I like it.

I feel like tl:ai would fit better because ai:dr reads, "ai, didn't read" but presumably the ai did read, while "too long, ai" fits the action better

I read it as "ai, don't read"

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#36

Post by arkadiuss »

zimpenfish wrote: post #4

I'm guessing the writing is AI-assisted (there's no fluidity and it has some weirdly placed phrases) but I see they're in Poland and likely not English-language first?

Exactly, thanks! I'm not English-native, and while most was wrote by hand, some AI assistance makes it more understandable/better readable.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#37

Post by arkadiuss »

rgovostes wrote: post #2

It takes more like 10 seconds. For a large range of height and weight inputs crossed with all option combinations, you could precompute ~10M measurements and return results basically instantly.

Yeah, the demo wasn't prepared for such peak. Normally it's <2s after warm-up. Like the precomputation idea, but for now it changes too dynamically to precompute each time.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#39

Post by arkadiuss »

sorenjan wrote: post #33
gwerbin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a common phenomenon in model fitting, depending on the type of model. In both old school regression and neural networks, the fitted model does not distinguish between specific training examples and other inputs. So specific input-output pairs from the training data don't get special privilege. In fact it's often a good thing that models don't just memorize inputt-output pairs from training, because that allows…

Yes, but why are they estimating the features when they are already available? They can estimate the other measurements from height etc, and just use the known inputs as is. I don't get the point of passing them through a model at all.

The previous response was exactly right. The estimated features are impacting height, so the height can't be set then do the rest. It also cannot be tuned afterwards because it would change the mass. So vicious circle.

Re: A 3D Body from Eight Questions – No Photo, No GPU

#40

Post by arekn »

aaclark wrote: post #3

ai;dr MLP trained on 8 questions achieves ~0.3cm height error, ~0.3kg weight error, and ~3-4cm for bust/waist/hips measurements. https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/5/1885 + some hacking => "we want to productize this"

Hey, I'm cofounder. Overall relevant summary, but here is extra context: ai;dr - neither of us are english natives. We use AI, but the content and research is ours and AI could not do it well enough. It's n'th iteration. In fact, we started with photo-based approach and over time simplified it to single questionnaire which yields better results. simple != easy != obvious

why: no fancy equipment, no weird camera scanning (yielding bad results anyways). Still plenty of opportunities to make it even simpler. Ideally we'd measure full body as well or better than a tailor with a tape measure in just few minutes. Possibly without tape measure. We're still long way off both in tech and UX, but good enough for market validation

errors: all of that is roughly within the errors that you'd get from tape measurements. If it's could enough for bespoke, it's good enough to tell you that your bicep won't feel comfortable inthe sleeve

Post reply on HN