[HN Gopher] Stanford Bunny
___________________________________________________________________
Stanford Bunny
Author : dcminter
Score : 101 points
Date : 2021-05-25 12:18 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
| riffic wrote:
| better than that damned teapot.
| phkahler wrote:
| The teapot was actually designed with Bezier surfaces. That
| makes it a whole different animal.
| tinus_hn wrote:
| The teapot is a design, the bunny is a scan. That is the most
| important difference.
| dahart wrote:
| What do you mean exactly? The teapot was "scanned" from a
| physical model, not designed from scratch. I'm quoting
| "scanned" because it was a manual process, and it'd be fair
| to say there was a little bit of design involved. But the
| primary distinction you made here between design and scan
| isn't really accurate without more qualification or
| explanation. You can see pictures of the original physical
| teapot model and the scan data (drawings) on the WP page
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_teapot
| paulpauper wrote:
| the teapot was done 2 decades earlier. much more impressive
| technologically. think about trying to display pixelated
| graphics in 3d on 70s tech. mind blown.
| anonu wrote:
| Reminds me of Lenna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna
| toxik wrote:
| I think it's sad that Lenna had to go, with vague arguments of
| sexism. She's a photo model. Most photo models are women,
| because that's the reality we live in. I would have thought it
| cute that my (tiny) country is represented in these contexts,
| but no, she was a beautiful woman and that's sexist to use as a
| test subject.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Without passing any judgement, I think it's important to note
| that she is a nude photo model. The image is a cropped
| Playboy centerfold.
| jimmaswell wrote:
| I wonder how much of the push against Lenna was veiled
| jealousy.
| flakiness wrote:
| I had no idea about Easter when I downloaded and tweaked the mesh
| model as a collage student. It was too foreign to me as a non-
| Christian county (Japan) resident. I dreamed to get to see that
| "special" bunny someday. Now live in U.S. the same-looking bunny
| is everywhere and I've lost the interest getting one. Still, from
| time to time I wonder which bunny it exactly was and if I can
| find one, in the mob.
|
| Tangentially related, I bought a teapot from Melitta on e-bay and
| am still using it. It's not "that" one, but it shares some of the
| taste from the brand. The teapot has a piece of uniqueness,
| unlike the bunny.
| anonu wrote:
| You mean this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_teapot
| lapetitejort wrote:
| OP could also be referring to Russell's Teapot, although I
| think that model stopped production in the 70s.
| ink_13 wrote:
| It turns out those are still made by the original factory in
| Germany: https://friesland-porzellan.de/utah-teekanne
| tralarpa wrote:
| That's interesting. The article says that, until recently,
| the company didn't know that their teapot is so famous.
| laddershoe wrote:
| Man, does that thing bring back memories. I did my PhD in
| computer graphics (though I no longer work in that field) -- I've
| written several papers and read more than I can count. That bunny
| is iconic and still shows up in some absurd number, although it's
| considered a trivially simple model now. Even so, it can find
| ways to bite you; there are holes in the base can cause problems
| with some algorithms (sure you can find watertight versions...
| but that's cheating ;)
|
| Fun times.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| Hugh Hoppe, from Microsoft, wrote some fundamental progressive-
| mesh code that he showed at SIGGRAPH '97 using this model.
| Instead of the code having to choose from different model
| resolutions (like the original four bunny models), the algorithm
| would allow DirectX to reduce the vertex count based on the
| rendered size of the object (1 pixel only needs 1 vertex!) to
| save compute cycles.
|
| I wonder if geometry compression is still a thing given the
| performance increases of GPUs. I haven't done 3D driver work
| since DirectX 5....
| flakiness wrote:
| For someone who's moderately interested:
| http://hhoppe.com/lapped_stonebunny_siggraph_cover.html
|
| Glad to see he's still "the mesh guy", wondering what he's
| doing at Google. http://hhoppe.com/#publications
| corysama wrote:
| Continuous LOD research dropped off dramatically when GPUs got
| vertex shaders. At that point, having the CPU touching the
| vertex data at all became more expensive than it could be
| worth.
|
| Instead, 3 or 4 static LODs have been the way to go. Those
| static meshes can be individually well optimized. There are
| surprisingly few good options for auto generating static LODs
| even today...
|
| Mesh Shaders are opening up whole new opportunities that are
| only starting to be explored. You get far more general purpose,
| compute shader like features. But, you have to work in small
| packets. Funny enough, they are a lot like PlayStation 2 vector
| unit programming made modern. That design really was ahead of
| it's time. But, the fundamental physics advantages of SIMD
| working on a small chunk of SRAM are as valid as ever.
| Causality1 wrote:
| It pleases me that someone named Hoppe picked a rabbit for the
| demo.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| Ha! In 24 years I never made that connection.
| plafl wrote:
| Not for GPUs AFAIK but still related:
| https://www.blosc.org/pages/blosc-in-depth/
| Philip-J-Fry wrote:
| It's funny you say that because that's effectively what Unreal
| Engine 5 is doing with it's Nanite technology. Also released in
| early access today.
|
| I do wonder what the problem was that needed to be solved
| before we got Nanite. Everyone knew that automatically
| optimising the geometry for the size on the screen was doable.
| Maybe it was a storage limitation?
| wetmore wrote:
| Very much still a thing, e.g. for reducing the poly count of a
| mesh before running it through a procedure to spit out gcode
| for 3d printing or milling.
| dahart wrote:
| Yeah, geometry compression is definitely still a thing. The
| main reason is that the relative gap between compute speed and
| memory bandwidth is still growing. It's pretty common now to
| bump into situations where redundant computation is faster than
| reading saved results from memory. Compression is perhaps
| ironically or surprisingly getting more important as GPU perf
| increases...
| dzign wrote:
| And its friends, Utah teapot, Cornell box and Susanne, the
| Blender monkey.
| Daub wrote:
| The Utah teapot, or the 'teapotahedron' as it is sometimes
| termed.
| genpfault wrote:
| The 6th Platonic solid[1]
|
| [1]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d5/The_Six_P
| lato...
| sp332 wrote:
| And the tree
| http://web.stanford.edu/~siegelr/stanford/thetree.html
|
| I know the tree is different, but I mention it because they put
| out some software, named Dryad, that let you explore the latent
| space of tree parameters - leaf shape, branch angle, etc. And
| the default tree was one that resembled the mascot. The
| software was discontinued and I guess the standard Stanford
| Tree model never took off.
| LegitShady wrote:
| Ive always used benchy the boat.
|
| www.3dbenchy.com
| nonsen wrote:
| I'm sure I ate one of these as a child.
| FriendlyNormie wrote:
| That explains a lot of things.
| teachingassist wrote:
| The Lindt bunny does look similar but I guess it's lower
| resolution ;-)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-26 23:01 UTC)