Neural Capture · Demo: open Demo tour

Monograph · 09 · Evaluation

09

Thesis pipeline · measure · results

Evaluation

Presenting? Prefer the linear Demo tour (5 stops) — press 1–5. This page is the full plate archive, ordered like the tour.
Chapter contract

Owns visual + quantitative results on identical captures: RealityCapture vs Nerfacto vs Splatfacto, hard materials, polarization, outdoor comparisons. Must not present unfinished inverse sphere experiments as results. Done when a hiring manager can see the outcomes without opening the PDF.

Headline metrics

33.27 dBSplatfacto avg PSNR · studio
22.07 dBNerfacto avg PSNR · studio
0.53–0.76 pxstudio mean reprojection (RC+ArUco)
77.4%Gränsö images aligned · 0.61 px

Same multi-view inputs. Photogrammetry for geometry gates; neural methods for novel views — especially where feature matching dies.

Studio dataset · what we captured

All studio objects overview
Plate EV-1

Dataset 15 objects · 12 cams × 36 steps · diffuse → glossy → glass. Deliberate failure cases included.

Objects grid
EV-1b

Alternate overview plate from thesis figures.

Dataset release thumbnail
EV-1c

Public release Internet Archive studio dataset card.

Intensity histograms
Plate EV-2

Intensity histograms. Material-driven dynamic range — not one easy texture class.

Material BRDF variety
Plate EV-3

Material spread used in evaluation storytelling (thesis figure).

System plates

Reconstruction pipeline plates

End-to-end evidence: capture → alignment → neural / photo outputs.

Pipeline part 1
Plate EV-4a

Thesis figure Pipeline overview · part 1.

Pipeline part 2
Plate EV-4b

Pipeline overview · part 2.

Pipeline part 3
Plate EV-4c

Pipeline overview · part 3.

Method comparison matrix
Plate EV-5

Method matrix. Photogrammetry vs neural outcomes on shared inputs.

Method compares · play the loops

Each pair is the same object / same capture. Left column Nerfacto, right Splatfacto (where both exist).

EV-V1a

Nerfacto Metal pot

EV-V1b

Splatfacto Metal pot — specular highlights track the view

EV-V2a

Nerfacto Banana (easy diffuse baseline)

EV-V2b

Splatfacto Banana — sharper high-frequency surface

EV-V3a

Nerfacto Glass vase (refractive stress case)

EV-V3b

Splatfacto Glass vase — still synthesizes views where mesh fails

Hard materials · photo vs neural story

Spray (textureless white) and Vase Glass (refractive): RealityCapture cannot lock trustworthy dense geometry. Neural methods still produce usable novel views. Specular metal dropped RC alignment into ~88–92%.

Dog capture
EV-H1

Capture / render example (dog).

Dog mesh
EV-H2

Photogrammetry mesh plate for comparison.

Polarization validation

Cross-pol strips specular peaks so classical matching can recover glossy surfaces. Capture physics still matters.

Without polarization
EV-P1

Without cross-pol — specular-heavy failure mode.

With polarization
EV-P2

With cross-pol — specular suppressed.

Outdoor results · Gränsö

~5.2kimages · drone + SLR
77.4%RC aligned
0.61 pxmean reprojection
23.2 / 14.7Splat / Nerf dB region
RC aerial
EV-O1

RC aerial context.

RC entrance facade
EV-O2

RealityCapture entrance / facade detail.

Nerf outdoor
EV-O3

Nerfacto outdoor still.

Splat outdoor
EV-O4

Splatfacto outdoor still.

Nerf sections
EV-O5

Neural outdoor multi-view sections plate.

EV-O6

Flythrough RealityCapture Gränsö reconstruction.

Out of scope

Inverse-rendering gold/matte/chrome sphere grids from slides were exploratory and did not complete as thesis contributions. They are not result plates above.