2
$\begingroup$

The photographic version shows much more detailed fur than the popular test image.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Hi, El-ahrairah. Welcome to the site! Do you have links for the images you're comparing? $\endgroup$
    – luser droog
    Commented Mar 10, 2022 at 2:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @luser droog Probably the third picture down in this article: faculty.cc.gatech.edu/~turk/bunny/bunny.html . There are also 289 light field images (not enough angles for photogrammetry, sadly) made with a Lego Mindstorms gantry here: graphics.stanford.edu/data/LF/lfs.html $\endgroup$
    – KickAir8p
    Commented Mar 11, 2022 at 1:10

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The latest scan of the Stanford Bunny that I'm aware of was in January 2000, a CT scan: “The scale of the voxel data is 0.337891 mm x 0.337891 mm x 0.5mm in the x-, y-, and z-dimensions respectively. The greyscale units are Hounsfield units, denoting electron-density of the subject. The data is raw 512x512 slices, unsigned, 12 bit data stored as 16bit (2-byte) pixels.”

http://graphics.stanford.edu/data/voldata/voldata.html#bunny

That link includes a download of the data, although I don't know how to open the files. Even though the scan is later than the original 1994 range data, I'm not sure it can be considered higher resolution for 3D purposes.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.