Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 12, 2024. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 12, 2024. It is now read-only.

Incorrect Visualization Results (using SMPL) #30

@juxuan27

Description

@juxuan27

I'm very interested in this dataset so I did some experiments with SMPL backbone. But the result turns out quite surprising, so I further analyzed the dataset. My approach is to use run_vis.py to re-run unreasonable videos on my model. And here are my results:

  • gBR_sFM_c09_d04_mBR4_ch07

with the setting

flags.DEFINE_string(
    'video_name',
    'gBR_sFM_c09_d04_mBR4_ch07',
    'input video name to be visualized.')
flags.DEFINE_enum(
    'mode', 'SMPL', ['2D', '3D', 'SMPL', 'SMPLMesh'],
    'visualize 3D or 2D keypoints, or SMPL joints on image plane.')

image

  • gBR_sBM_c05_d04_mBR0_ch08

with the setting

flags.DEFINE_string(
    'video_name',
    'gBR_sBM_c05_d04_mBR0_ch08',
    'input video name to be visualized.')
flags.DEFINE_enum(
    'mode', 'SMPL', ['2D', '3D', 'SMPL', 'SMPLMesh'],
    'visualize 3D or 2D keypoints, or SMPL joints on image plane.')

image

  • gJB_sBM_c06_d07_mJB3_ch05

with the setting

flags.DEFINE_string(
    'video_name',
    'gJB_sBM_c06_d07_mJB3_ch05',
    'input video name to be visualized.')
flags.DEFINE_enum(
    'mode', 'SMPLMesh', ['2D', '3D', 'SMPL', 'SMPLMesh'],
    'visualize 3D or 2D keypoints, or SMPL joints on image plane.')

image

image

I'm wondering if anyone else has similar results? Or did I make a mistake on the code running? Cause I found hundreds of videos like above.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions