You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Why do you normalize the direction vector $d_i$ in the loss (equation 3)? Can't we directly optimize for matching the position $g_i$ itself? Is it for making the latent optimization more gradual? If so, how important is it?
Maybe related to the previous question -- why is the point tracking step necessary? I see that in equation 3 you are taking the target feature $sg(F_q(\hat{z}^k_t))$ from the optimized latent, which of course requires $q$ to be updated in the next steps by point tracking. But why can't the target feature be taken from the original latent, without having to update $q$?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I was also wondering about the same. It seems like eq 3 has handle positions in pixel coordinates (not in natural image coordinates (0,1)^2 as I expected) so each update tries to move the point slightly. Also note that if handle position is already close to the target we skip corresponding loss term - see here
As for 2 my guess is that we want to update features gradually. Some points in $\Omega$-region may change completely (think about the statue example - if the handle point is on the nose, under extreme rotations we want to have background pixels)
I would love to hear some confirmation from the authors
Hello,
Thanks for sharing your great work!
I have 2 questions regarding motion supervision:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: