2DASL
2DASL copied to clipboard
XgTu
How did you evaluate the NME of your model and PRNet in 3D face reconstruction?
PRNet has different dimensions than any other model because the neck part is removed. When I evaluated PRNet and your model, I found that PRNet's has the worst NME, probably because I removed some dimensions from the ground truth, so how did you evaluate the two models?
hi, how to get NME of PRNet，i get a bigger result compare to the NME paper. hope your reply!thanks!
Hi @deepdarkfans , did you get your answer? I have the same question as we get 43K vertices using PRNet but the groundtruth for AFLW2000 data set has 53K vertices.
Hi @deepdarkfans , did you get your answer? I have the same question as we get 43K vertices using PRNet but the groundtruth for AFLW2000 data set has 53K vertices.
No, but I have a method you can try. When calculating NME, you can multiply the ground truth of AFLW2000 by the weight matrix of the PRNet loss function, which should ignore the neck part
hi, how to get NME of PRNet，i get a bigger result compare to the NME paper. hope your reply!thanks!
I have a method you can try. When calculating NME, you can multiply the ground truth of AFLW2000 by the weight matrix of the PRNet loss function, which should ignore the neck part
Hi @deepdarkfans , did you get your answer? I have the same question as we get 43K vertices using PRNet but the groundtruth for AFLW2000 data set has 53K vertices.
No, but I have a method you can try. When calculating NME, you can multiply the ground truth of AFLW2000 by the weight matrix of the PRNet loss function, which should ignore the neck part
Thank you for your reply. Where can I find this weight matrix? Do you mean the uv_face _mask in ./Data folder? (below)
But this can be multiplied by the uv position map not the vertices. So should we first convert AFLW2000 ground truth to uv position map and then multiply with this map?
