Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Porting to Octave? Improve python code? #15

Open
MarlNox opened this issue Nov 2, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Porting to Octave? Improve python code? #15

MarlNox opened this issue Nov 2, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@MarlNox
Copy link

MarlNox commented Nov 2, 2020

Hello all,

I've been experimenting with your code in pytorch, and it is my understanding that there is a final step that is not applied using the python/torch method you've published. The results in this repo seem to be way more accurate than pytorch is able to provide.
In that light I have two questions:

  1. Is this code runnable using Octave?
    or alternatively:
  2. Taking into account the Matlab version produces much better results. What is the difference between this code and and the pytorch one, does it change any steps for to account for the increase accuracy and result quality, or it misses any final step completely? If yes, which ones, so that I can promptly check that out.

Thank you,

@eladrich
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi,
The new code includes only the depth reconstruction network, without the non-rigid ICP and the shape from shading steps, Please see the readme of the new repo for more. Currently, we have no plans to export these steps to octave or python.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants