Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 64 references

VidAnimator: User-Guided Stylized 3D Character Animation from Human Videos

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A mixed-initiative pipeline lets stylized 3D characters mimic human videos, and user-guided edits measurably improve the automatic result.

desk verdict A genuinely novel color-based weight editor for skeleton-free pose transfer, wrapped in an under-evaluated mixed-initiative system that deserves peer review but not acceptance as-is. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.01878 v1 pith:S6PLXF3H submitted 2025-08-03 cs.HC

Xinwu Ye , Jun-Hsiang Yao , Jielin Feng , Shuhong Mei , Xingyu Lan , Siming Chen This is my paper
classification cs.HC
keywords motioncapturetransferstylized3Dcharactersmixed-initiativedesignskinningweightscharacteranimationhuman-AIcollaborationvideo-driven
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

VidAnimator proposes a mixed-initiative pipeline for making stylized 3D characters—both humanoid and non-humanoid—mimic the motion in an ordinary single-view human video, without requiring the user to rig a skeleton. The paper's central claim is that adding two interactive editing tools, a pose editor for frame-level joint corrections and a weight editor for adjusting how character body parts correspond to human body parts, measurably improves the result over running motion capture and motion transfer automatically. A questionnaire study with 30 participants found that refined outputs scored higher than the automatic baseline on both motion similarity (4.30 vs. 4.03) and smoothness and naturalness (4.48 vs. 4.00), with the differences reported as statistically significant. The work matters because stylized character animation is normally a specialist skill, and the authors argue their framework lowers the barrier for general users while keeping creative control.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the skinning-weight correspondence between the source human character and the target character: per-vertex skinning weights encode which deformation primitive moves each part of the mesh, and SFPT transfers poses using these weights rather than a skeleton. On top of this, the paper contributes a color-weight converter that turns a user's vertex recoloring into a new skinning weight vector, using inverse-distance weighting combined with a kernel density estimate so that nearby mispredicted vertices do not dominate. The pose editor supplies the second mechanism, letting users adjust joint rotations and translations on chosen keyframes of the captured human animation. Together these make the otherwise opaque learned correspondence editable by a non-expert.

What would settle it

Recruit novice participants, give them only the VidAnimator interface and a short tutorial, and ask them to refine the same video-character pairs used in the questionnaire; if their refined outputs are not rated higher than the automatic baseline on similarity and smoothness, the paper's central claim about user-guided improvement is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that automatic motion capture with DeepMotion plus skeleton-free pose transfer with SFPT can already drive stylized 3D characters from human videos, but the result is imperfect and the implicit correspondence between the human character and the target character is often not what users want. The discovery is that letting users edit either the captured human pose or the skinning-weight correspondence—through a color-based weight editor that translates vertex colors into modified skinning weights—fixes the largest visible failures, such as deformed hands, mismatched legs, and lifeless abstract characters. Across seven target characters, the refined animations were rated more similar to the source video and smoother and more natural than the fully automatic baseline; humanoid characters benefited more than non-humanoid ones, and three case studies show specific weight-label corrections that remove deformations.

Load-bearing premise

The whole benefit of interactive refinement rests on the assumption that the intended users, not just the researchers, can actually operate the pose editor and the weight editor; the paper does not report who performed the refinements, and one user already found the Pose Editor hard to navigate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Non-professional users can produce usable stylized 3D character animations from a single human video, skipping rigging and weight painting.
  • Interactive refinement is worth doing: the questionnaire results indicate that the mixed-initiative result beats the automatic MoCap-plus-MoTrans baseline on perceived similarity and smoothness.
  • Humanoid characters are the near-term sweet spot; non-humanoid characters like flowers can be animated but require more correspondence tuning and remain more abstract.
  • The weight-label guidelines (mirror good correspondences across symmetric sides, map unusual labels to human anatomy) give a repeatable recipe for fixing common deformations.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the color-weight converter pattern generalizes, any learned correspondence field—for example in 2D image animation or avatar control—could expose a directable color or weight overlay to end users.
  • The reported gains are modest (about 0.3 points on a 7-point scale), so a reasonable next test is a between-subjects study where novices and experts each refine the same clips to see whether the improvement survives without researcher involvement.
  • The Pose Editor's frame-by-frame joint editing is a bottleneck for longer videos; pairing it with recent motion-synthesis models could keep the interactive benefit while reducing manual keyframing.
  • A larger validation with more target characters and source videos, plus measurable metrics such as foot sliding or mesh penetration, would test whether the perceived improvements correspond to objective motion quality.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper presents VidAnimator, a mixed-initiative system that animates stylized 3D characters from single-view human videos. The pipeline combines DeepMotion's monocular motion capture for a human character with the skeleton-free pose transfer model SFPT to drive the stylized target character. Two interactive tools are introduced: a pose editor for frame-level joint correction and a skinning-weight editor that maps vertex color edits to weight changes through a color-weight converter based on inverse distance weighting and kernel density estimation. The authors evaluate the system via a questionnaire study (N=30) comparing automatic (MoCap+MoTrans) output against a refined version that includes interactive adjustments, reporting higher similarity and smoothness ratings for the refined output. Three case studies with humanoid and non-humanoid characters illustrate the use of the weight editor, and the paper distills two refinement guidelines from this experience.

Significance. If the central claim is supported, the work makes a useful contribution to accessible stylized character animation by integrating established MoCap and pose-transfer models with a lightweight, intuitive refinement interface. The color-based weight editor is an appealing idea and the case studies give qualitative evidence that manual weight-label adjustments can repair visible artifacts. The paper is clearly written, and the design considerations (C1, C2) are sensible. However, the quantitative evidence for the headline claim that user guidance improves quality is currently not convincing: the evaluation lacks full inferential statistics, and the identity/independence of the person who performed the refinements is not disclosed. As a result, the significance of the measured improvements is uncertain.

major comments (3)
  1. [7.1.4 (Effectiveness)] The paper claims that the refinement method 'achieved significantly higher scores' at α=0.05 with a paired t-test, but it reports only means and standard deviations, with no t-statistic, degrees of freedom, p-value, effect size, or confidence interval. The reader cannot verify the significance claim from the manuscript. Please report the full test results or soften the claim accordingly. In addition, the paper never states who performed the interactive refinements presented to questionnaire participants; §7.3 describes 'the user' without any recruitment or expertise information. If the refinements were made by the system's designers, the comparison conflates system capability with author expertise, and the results do not demonstrate that target users can achieve these gains. The study should either include target users performing the refinement or be explicitly framed as a demonstration of expert-curated refinement.
  2. [4.5.2, Eq. (3)] The skinning weights are defined in Eq. (1) to satisfy ||W||_1 = 1 with entries in [0,1]. However, Eq. (3) normalizes the edited weight vector by its L2 norm. For non-negative vectors, L2 normalization does not preserve the sum-to-one property (e.g., a vector (0.5, 0.5) becomes (0.707, 0.707) after L2 normalization). Thus the color-weight converter as written can output weights that violate Eq. (1), which should affect the subsequent linear blending skinning deformation. Please correct the normalization (e.g., use L1 normalization or a softmax) and clarify how the predicted skinning weights maintain the stated constraint.
  3. [7.1.4 / 7.1.5] Even apart from the missing test statistics, the reported mean differences are small (0.27 for similarity and 0.48 for smoothness on a 0–6 scale), and the sample is a convenience sample of 30 students recruited through WeChat. The paper does not report confidence intervals or effect sizes, making it impossible to judge whether the differences are practically meaningful, and the two paired t-tests are conducted without correction for multiplicity or any check of the normality assumption. Please provide a more complete statistical account, including effect sizes and confidence intervals, or temper the claim that interactive adjustments 'yield superior performance.'
minor comments (7)
  1. [Sections 6 and 7] Section 6 is also titled 'Method Analysis' but contains only a duplicate of the Implementation paragraph from §5.5; Section 7 then begins with the actual evaluation. Please renumber or remove the duplicate section.
  2. [4.5.2, Eqs. (6)–(7)] The Gaussian kernel in Eq. (7) is written with h^2 in the normalization, which is not the standard form and is inconsistent with the definition of K_h in Eq. (6). Please check the kernel formula and the bandwidth normalization.
  3. [4.5.2] The sentence about assigning the k'th value of W_v to 0 for a non-covered deformation body part is repeated verbatim later in the same subsection; please remove the duplicate.
  4. [4.1.2, Eq. (1)] There is a typo: 'constrants' should be 'constraints'.
  5. [7.1.3] The text uses 'Phd students'; this should be 'PhD students'.
  6. [7.1.4] The description of the Likert scale is slightly confusing: the scale is described as ranging from 0 to 6, and a score above 4 is said to align with 'somewhat agree.' Clarify the scale anchors, especially whether 3 is the neutral midpoint.
  7. [Figure 4] The bar charts in Fig. 4(B) and (C) do not show error bars or confidence intervals, making it hard to gauge the variability; consider adding them to support the statistical claims.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the system's components are external pretrained models, and the evaluation metric is an independent perceptual judgment.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain for the framework uses the external DeepMotion MoCap API and the pretrained SFPT model as building blocks; no internal fitted parameter is subsequently renamed as a prediction. The questionnaire study measures perceived similarity and naturalness against the original human video, which is an external criterion independent of the system's internal representations, so the comparison between baseline and refinement is not forced by construction. The only self-citation, reference [58], appears in the introduction as general motivation about social-media demand and is not load-bearing for the technical or empirical claims. The case studies are used to illustrate the interaction guidelines in Section 7.2, and the guidelines are partly derived from the same case studies, but this is a mild validation-loop concern about generalizability rather than a circular derivation. No equation, fitted parameter, or imported theorem reduces the central claim to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on external pretrained models, DeepMotion MoCap and SFPT, and on heuristic choices in the color-weight converter, p equal to 1 and Scott bandwidth, that are not derived or independently validated. The questionnaire and case studies provide qualitative support but no objective motion metrics.

free parameters (2)
  • Inverse distance weighting power p = 1
    Chosen by hand in Eq. (5); no sensitivity analysis, and it controls how strongly nearby vertices influence the edited weight.
  • KDE bandwidth h = Scott estimate
    Estimated via Scott's rule for the Gaussian kernel in Eqs. (6) and (7); the choice affects the weight blending in the color-weight converter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The pretrained SFPT model generalizes to arbitrary stylized characters with topologies far from human bodies.
    The entire MoTrans stage relies on SFPT's implicit correspondences; Section 4.4 states it handles 'diverse shapes, topologies, and mesh connectivities', but no new training or adaptation is done for the user's character.
  • domain assumption DeepMotion's monocular MoCap produces sufficiently accurate 3D human animation from arbitrary single-view videos.
    The pipeline's first stage depends on the external API's output; the paper notes inaccuracies in Section 1 and relies on the pose editor to fix them.
  • standard math Skinning weights satisfy Eq. (1) and LBS deformation as defined in SFPT.
    The weight editor operates within the LBS framework; this is a standard background model, not re-derived.
  • ad hoc to paper The color-weight converter's inverse distance weighting and KDE heuristics map user color edits onto sensible skinning weights.
    Equations (2) through (7) are introduced without derivation from first principles; effectiveness is asserted as 'empirically shown effective' in Section 4.5.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of VidAnimator: User-Guided Stylized 3D Character Animation from Human Videos." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/S6PLXF3H

@misc{pith2026250801878,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: VidAnimator: User-Guided Stylized 3D Character Animation from Human Videos},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/S6PLXF3H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.01878}
}
read the original abstract

With captivating visual effects, stylized 3D character animation has gained widespread use in cinematic production, advertising, social media, and the potential development of virtual reality (VR) non-player characters (NPCs). However, animating stylized 3D characters often requires significant time and effort from animators. We propose a mixed-initiative framework and interactive system to enable stylized 3D characters to mimic motion in human videos. The framework takes a single-view human video and a stylized 3D character (the target character) as input, captures the motion of the video, and then transfers the motion to the target character. In addition, it involves two interaction modules for customizing the result. Accordingly, the system incorporates two authoring tools that empower users with intuitive modification. A questionnaire study offers tangible evidence of the framework's capability of generating natural stylized 3D character animations similar to the motion in the video. Additionally, three case studies demonstrate the utility of our approach in creating diverse results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.01878 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. VidAnimator consists of (A) the Upload Interface for video and 3D character; (B) the Pose Editor and (C) MoCap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of our approach. On the human side, the input consists of a stylized 3D character (the target character) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. This figure provides an in-depth exploration of Vi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sample questions and results in Questionnaire Study (N=30): (A) Sample questions specifically designed to evaluate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: This figure displays the color-coded weight cor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visualization results of motion transfer: Columns from left to right represent different pairs of characters for motion [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Four consecutive frames illustrating the comparison [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Blender - a 3D Modelling and Rendering Package

    2018. Blender - a 3D Modelling and Rendering Package. Blender Foundation

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    2019. Maya. https://autodesk.com/maya

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    2022. Mixamo. https://www.mixamo.com

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Avaturn X DeepMotion

    2023. Avaturn X DeepMotion. https://www.deepmotion.com/companion-tools/ avaturn

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    DeepMotion

    2023. DeepMotion. https://www.deepmotion.com/

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Roblox X DeepMotion

    2023. Roblox X DeepMotion. https://www.deepmotion.com/companion-tools/ roblox

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Abdul-Massih, I

    M. Abdul-Massih, I. Yoo, and B. Benes. 2017. Motion Style Retargeting to Charac- ters With Different Morphologies: Retargeting to Different Morphologies. Com- puter Graphics Forum 36, 6 (Sept. 2017), 86–99

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Kfir Aberman, Peizhuo Li, Dani Lischinski, Olga Sorkine-Hornung, Daniel Cohen- Or, and Baoquan Chen. 2020. Skeleton-Aware Networks for Deep Motion Retar- geting. ACM Transactions on Graphics 39, 4 (Aug. 2020)

    work page 2020

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Black, Scott L

    Mazen Al Borno, Ludovic Righetti, Michael J. Black, Scott L. Delp, Eugene Fiume, and Javier Romero. 2018. Robust Physics-Based Motion Retargeting with Realistic Body Shapes. Computer Graphics Forum 37, 8 (Dec. 2018), 81–92

    2018

  2. [10]

    Amani and A

    N. Amani and A. R. Yuly. 2019. 3D Modeling and Animating of Characters in Educational Game. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series , Vol. 1193. IOP Publishing, 012025

    2019

  3. [11]

    Andreas Baak, Meinard Müller, Gaurav Bharaj, Hans-Peter Seidel, and Christian Theobalt. 2013. A Data-Driven Approach for Real-Time Full Body Pose Recon- struction from a Depth Camera. Consumer Depth Cameras for Computer Vision: Research Topics and Applications (2013), 71–98

    2013

  4. [12]

    Jean Basset, Stefanie Wuhrer, Edmond Boyer, and Franck Multon. 2020. Contact Preserving Shape Transfer: Retargeting Motion from One Shape to Another. Computers & Graphics 89 (June 2020), 11–23

    2020

  5. [13]

    Mikhail Bessmeltsev, Nicholas Vining, and Alla Sheffer. 2016. Gesture3D: Posing 3D Characters via Gesture Drawings. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 35, 6 (2016), 1–13

    2016

  6. [14]

    Christoph Bregler, Lorie Loeb, Erika Chuang, and Hrishi Deshpande. 2002. Turn- ing to the Masters: Motion Capturing Cartoons. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 21, 3 (2002), 399–407

    2002

  7. [15]

    Hongsuk Choi, Gyeongsik Moon, Ju Yong Chang, and Kyoung Mu Lee. 2021. Beyond Static Features for Temporally Consistent 3d Human Pose and Shape from a Video. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 1964–1973

    2021

  8. [16]

    Kwang-Jin Choi and Hyeong-Seok Ko. [n. d.]. On-Line Motion Retargetting. ([n. d.])

  9. [17]

    James Davis, Maneesh Agrawala, Erika Chuang, and Zoran Popovi. [n. d.]. A Sketching Interface for Articulated Figure Animation. ([n. d.])

  10. [18]

    Edilson De Aguiar, Rhaleb Zayer, Christian Theobalt, Marcus Magnor, and Hans- Peter Seidel. 2007. Video-Driven Animation of Human Body Scans. In 2007 3DTV Conference. IEEE, Kos, Greece, 1–4

    2007

  11. [19]

    Junting Dong, Qing Shuai, Yuanqing Zhang, Xian Liu, Xiaowei Zhou, and Hujun Bao. 2020. Motion Capture from Internet Videos. http://arxiv.org/abs/2008.07931. arXiv:2008.07931 [cs]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Michael Gleicher. 1998. Retargetting Motion to New Characters. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques - SIGGRAPH ’98. ACM Press, Not Known, 33–42

    1998

  13. [21]

    Ikhsanul Habibie, Daniel Holden, Jonathan Schwarz, Joe Yearsley, and Taku Komura. 2017. A Recurrent Variational Autoencoder for Human Motion Synthesis. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC) . Conference acronym ’XX, June 03–05, 2018, Woodstock, NY Ye a...

    2017

  14. [22]

    Daniel Holden, Jun Saito, and Taku Komura. 2016. A Deep Learning Framework for Character Motion Synthesis and Editing. ACM Transactions on Graphics 35, 4 (July 2016), 1–11

    2016

  15. [23]

    Karen Liu

    Sumit Jain, Yuting Ye, and C. Karen Liu. 2009. Optimization-Based Interactive Motion Synthesis. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 28, 1 (2009), 1–12

    2009

  16. [24]

    Ladislav Kavan. [n. d.]. Direct Skinning Methods and Deformation Primitives. numerical optimization ([n. d.])

  17. [25]

    Sinha, Mathieu Salzmann, and Pascal Fua

    Sena Kiciroglu, Helge Rhodin, Sudipta N. Sinha, Mathieu Salzmann, and Pascal Fua. 2020. Activemocap: Optimized Viewpoint Selection for Active Human Motion Capture. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 103–112

    2020

  18. [26]

    SangBin Kim, Inbum Park, Seongsu Kwon, and JungHyun Han. 2020. Motion Retargetting Based on Dilated Convolutions and Skeleton-Specific Loss Functions. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 39. Wiley Online Library, 497–507

    2020

  19. [27]

    Alexis Lamouret and Michiel Van De Panne. 1996. Motion Synthesis by Exam- ple. In Computer Animation and Simulation’96: Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop in Poitiers, France, August 31–September 1, 1996 . Springer, 199–212

    1996

  20. [28]

    Jiefeng Li, Siyuan Bian, Chao Xu, Gang Liu, Gang Yu, and Cewu Lu. 2022. D &D: Learning Human Dynamics from Dynamic Camera. In European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 479–496

    2022

  21. [29]

    Peizhuo Li, Kfir Aberman, Rana Hanocka, Libin Liu, Olga Sorkine-Hornung, and Baoquan Chen. 2021. Learning Skeletal Articulations with Neural Blend Shapes. ACM Transactions on Graphics 40, 4 (Aug. 2021), 1–15. arXiv:2105.02451 [cs]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Peizhuo Li, Kfir Aberman, Zihan Zhang, Rana Hanocka, and Olga Sorkine- Hornung. 2022. GANimator: Neural Motion Synthesis from a Single Sequence. ACM Transactions on Graphics 41, 4 (July 2022), 1–12

    2022

  23. [31]

    Weiyu Li, Xuelin Chen, Peizhuo Li, Olga Sorkine-Hornung, and Baoquan Chen

  24. [32]

    Yan Li, Tianshu Wang, and Heung-Yeung Shum. 2002. Motion Texture: A Two- Level Statistical Model for Character Motion Synthesis. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques . 465–472

    2002

  25. [33]

    Zhouyingcheng Liao, Jimei Yang, Jun Saito, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Yang Zhou

  26. [34]

    Jongin Lim. [n. d.]. PMnet: Learning of Disentangled Pose and Movement for Unsupervised Motion Retargeting. ([n. d.])

  27. [35]

    Minhua Ma and Paul McKEVITT. 2003. Building Character Animation for Intelli- gent Storytelling with the H-Anim Standard. In Proc. of the Eurographics Ireland 2003 Workshop (EG-Ireland-2003). Ulster University, 9–15

    2003

  28. [36]

    Shubh Maheshwari, Rahul Narain, and Ramya Hebbalaguppe. [n. d.]. Transfer4D: A Framework for Frugal Motion Capture and Deformation Transfer. ([n. d.])

  29. [37]

    Troje, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J

    Naureen Mahmood, Nima Ghorbani, Nikolaus F. Troje, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J. Black. 2019. AMASS: Archive of Motion Capture as Surface Shapes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision . 5442– 5451

    2019

  30. [38]

    Chen Mao, Sheng Feng Qin, and David K. Wright. 2006. Sketching-out Vir- tual Humans: From 2d Storyboarding to Immediate 3d Character Animation. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. 76–es

    2006

  31. [39]

    Jean-Sébastien Monzani, Paolo Baerlocher, Ronan Boulic, and Daniel Thalmann

  32. [40]

    Mourot, L

    L. Mourot, L. Hoyet, F. Le Clerc, François Schnitzler, and Pierre Hellier. 2022. A Survey on Deep Learning for Skeleton-Based Human Animation. Computer Graphics Forum 41, 1 (Feb. 2022), 122–157. arXiv:2110.06901 [cs]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Meinard Müller, Tido Röder, Michael Clausen, Bernhard Eberhardt, Björn Krüger, and Andreas Weber. 2007. Mocap Database Hdm05. Institut für Informatik II, Universität Bonn 2, 7 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    Ferda Ofli, Rizwan Chaudhry, Gregorij Kurillo, René Vidal, and Ruzena Bajcsy

  35. [43]

    Ravani and B

    B. Ravani and B. Roth. 1983. Motion Synthesis Using Kinematic Mappings. (1983)

    1983

  36. [44]

    Aliaksandr Siarohin, Stephane Lathuiliere, Sergey Tulyakov, Elisa Ricci, and Nicu Sebe. 2019. Animating Arbitrary Objects via Deep Motion Transfer. In 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) . IEEE, Long Beach, CA, USA, 2372–2381

    2019

  37. [45]

    Aliaksandr Siarohin, Stéphane Lathuilière, Sergey Tulyakov, Elisa Ricci, and Nicu Sebe. 2019. First Order Motion Model for Image Animation. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 32. Curran Associates, Inc

    2019

  38. [46]

    2015.Virtual Character Design for Games and Interactive Media

    Robin James Stuart Sloan. 2015.Virtual Character Design for Games and Interactive Media. CRC Press

    2015

  39. [47]

    Hyewon Song, Suwoong Heo, Jiwoo Kang, and Sanghoon Lee. 2015. 3D Character Animation: A Brief Review. Journal of International Society for Simulation Surgery 2 (Dec. 2015), 52–57

    2015

  40. [48]

    Qingkun Su, Xue Bai, Hongbo Fu, Chiew-Lan Tai, and Jue Wang. 2018. Live Sketch: Video-Driven Dynamic Deformation of Static Drawings. InProceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Montreal QC Canada, 1–12

    2018

  41. [49]

    Daniel Sýkora, John Dingliana, and Steven Collins. 2009. As-Rigid-as-Possible Image Registration for Hand-Drawn Cartoon Animations. InProceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering . ACM, New Orleans Louisiana, 25–33

    2009

  42. [50]

    Seyoon Tak. [n. d.]. A Physically-Based Motion Retargeting Filter. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics 24, 1 ([n. d.])

  43. [51]

    Ruben Villegas, Duygu Ceylan, Aaron Hertzmann, Jimei Yang, and Jun Saito. 2021. Contact-Aware Retargeting of Skinned Motion. In 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) . IEEE, Montreal, QC, Canada, 9700–9709

    2021

  44. [52]

    Ruben Villegas, Jimei Yang, Duygu Ceylan, and Honglak Lee. 2018. Neural Kinematic Networks for Unsupervised Motion Retargetting. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition . 8639–8648

    2018

  45. [53]

    Bastian Wandt, Marco Rudolph, Petrissa Zell, Helge Rhodin, and Bodo Rosenhahn

  46. [54]

    Haoyu Wang, Shaoli Huang, Fang Zhao, Chun Yuan, and Ying Shan. 2023. HMC: Hierarchical Mesh Coarsening for Skeleton-Free Motion Retargeting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.10941 (2023). arXiv:2303.10941

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Jiashun Wang, Xueting Li, Sifei Liu, Shalini De Mello, Orazio Gallo, Xiaolong Wang, and Jan Kautz. 2023. Zero-Shot Pose Transfer for Unrigged Stylized 3D Characters. In 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 8704–8714

    2023

  48. [56]

    Lirong Xiao. 2013. Animation Trends in Education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 3, 3 (2013), 286

    2013

  49. [57]

    Zhan Xu, Yang Zhou, Evangelos Kalogerakis, Chris Landreth, and Karan Singh

  50. [58]

    Yuheng Zhao, Jinjing Jiang, Yi Chen, Richen Liu, Yalong Yang, Xiangyang Xue, and Siming Chen. 2022. Metaverse: Perspectives from Graphics, Interactions and Visualization. Visual Informatics 6, 1 (2022), 56–67

    2022

  51. [2000]

    In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol

    Using an Intermediate Skeleton and Inverse Kinematics for Motion Retar- geting. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 19. Wiley Online Library, 11–19

  52. [2013]

    In 2013 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision (W ACV)

    Berkeley Mhad: A Comprehensive Multimodal Human Action Database. In 2013 IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision (W ACV). IEEE, 53–60

    2013

  53. [2020]

    http://arxiv.org/abs/ 2005.00559

    RigNet: Neural Rigging for Articulated Characters. http://arxiv.org/abs/ 2005.00559. arXiv:2005.00559 [cs]

    2005 arXiv

  54. [2021]

    In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Canonpose: Self-Supervised Monocular 3d Human Pose Estimation in the Wild. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 13294–13304

  55. [2022]

    http://arxiv.org/ abs/2208.00790

    Skeleton-Free Pose Transfer for Stylized 3D Characters. http://arxiv.org/ abs/2208.00790. arXiv:2208.00790 [cs]

    arXiv

  56. [2023]

    http: //arxiv.org/abs/2306.00378

    Example-Based Motion Synthesis via Generative Motion Matching. http: //arxiv.org/abs/2306.00378. arXiv:2306.00378 [cs]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.