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

MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

nihalsid.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 166 posts

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#71

Post by ajuc »

chefandy wrote: post #70
empath-nirvana wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A competent modeler can make these types of meshes in under 5 minutes. I don't think this general complaint about AI workflows is that useful. Most people are not a competent . Most people don't know a competent or can't afford to hire one. Even something that takes longer than a professional do at worse quality for many things is better than _nothing_ which is the realistic alternative for most people who would us…

> I don't think this general complaint about AI workflows is that useful Maybe not to you, but it's useful if you're in these fields professionally, though. The difference between a neat hobbyist toolkit and a professional toolkit has gigantic financial implications, even if the difference is minimal to "most people."

Linux vs Unix. Wikipedia vs Britannica. GCC vs Intel compiler. Good enough free hobby toy beats expansive professional tools given enough hobbysts.

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#73

Post by ShamelessC »

mlsu wrote: post #28

The next breakthrough will be the UX to create 3d scenes in front of a model like this, in VR. This would basically let you _generate_ a permanent, arbitrary 3D environment, for any environment for which we have training data. Diffusion models could be used to generate textures. Mark is right and so so early.

Mark?

edit: Oh, _that_ Mark? lol okay

edit edit: Maybe credit Lecun or something? Mark going all in on the metaverse was definitely not because he somehow predicted deep learning would take off. Even the people who trained the earliest models weren't sure how well it would work.

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#74

Post by orbital-decay »

kranke155 wrote: post #7

My chosen profession (3D / filmmaking) feels like being in some kind of combat trench at the moment. Both fascinating and scary

I don't know, 3D CGI has already been moving at the breakneck speed for the last three decades without any AI. Today's tools are qualitatively different (sculpting, simulation, auto-rigging etc etc etc).

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#76

Post by beebeepka »

Games and pretty much any other experience being generated by AI is obvious to anyone paying attention at this point. But how would it work. Are current ai generated images and videos using rasterisation? Will they use rasterisation, path tracing or any other traditional rendering technique, or is will it be an entirely different thing.

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#77

Post by ganzuul »

shaileshm wrote: post #4

This is what a truly revolutionary idea looks like. There are so many details in the paper. Also, we know that transformers can scale. Pretty sure this idea will be used by a lot of companies to train the general 3D asset creation pipeline. This is just too great. "We first learn a vocabulary of latent quantized embeddings, using graph convolutions, which inform these embeddings of the local mesh geometry and topolog…

...Is graph convolution matrix factorization by another name?

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#78

Post by ChatGTP »

andkenneth wrote: post #65
worldsayshi wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see that LLM's have come that much further in 3D animation than programming in this regard: It can spit out bits and pieces that looks okay in isolation but a human need to solve the puzzle. And often solving the puzzle means rewriting/redoing most of the pieces. We're safe for now but we should learn how to leverage the new tech.

This is the "your job won't be taken away by AI, it will be taken away by someone who knows how to leverage AI better than you"

Don’t worry , the price of goods will be exponentially cheaper, so you won’t need a job /s

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#79

Post by johnnyanmac »

empath-nirvana wrote: post #63
LarsDu88 wrote: post #47

As a machine learning engineer who dabbles with Blender and hobby gamedev, this is pretty impressive, but not quite to the point of being useful in any practical manner (as far as the limited furniture examples are concerned. A competent modeler can make these types of meshes in under 5 minutes, and you still need to seed the generation with polys. I imagine the next step will be to have the seed generation controlle…

> A competent modeler can make these types of meshes in under 5 minutes. I don't think this general complaint about AI workflows is that useful. Most people are not a competent . Most people don't know a competent or can't afford to hire one. Even something that takes longer than a professional do at worse quality for many things is better than _nothing_ which is the realistic alternative for most people who would us…

>Most people don't know a competent or can't afford to hire one

May be relevant in the long run, but it'll probably be 5+ years before this is commercially available. And it won't be cheap either, so out of the range of said people who can't hire a competent

That's why a lot of this stuff is pitched to companies with competent people instead of offered as a general product to download.

Re: MeshGPT: Generating triangle meshes with decoder-only transformers

#80

Post by johnnyanmac »

ajuc wrote: post #71
chefandy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think this general complaint about AI workflows is that useful Maybe not to you, but it's useful if you're in these fields professionally, though. The difference between a neat hobbyist toolkit and a professional toolkit has gigantic financial implications, even if the difference is minimal to "most people."

Linux vs Unix. Wikipedia vs Britannica. GCC vs Intel compiler. Good enough free hobby toy beats expansive professional tools given enough hobbysts.

1. they don't beat them outight. It's simply more accessible.

2. those "hobbyists" in all examples are in fact professionals now. That's why they could scale up.

Post reply on HN