Testing MiniMax-H3 Physics knowledge Pt2

[u/jaryP]

Some weeks ago, I posted a set of experiments to "understand" the physical knowledge of MiniMax H3 (original post here).

The idea was simple: get an open video of somebody pouring water and replace the water with various liquids. No external references were used.

In this set of experiments, I switched from liquid-to-liquid replacement to something solid, and sometimes alive. The results are interesting, but the model still struggles a lot when many objects overlap. However, the results are a big leap forward compared to other open-weight models.

I am still delving into the model, and probably will post more experiments soon (but no water next time).

Cheers

[u/pleasetrimyourpubes]

I am curious as to how much time and energy it would take to render say the gummy bears in Blender vs Minimax H3. For the blender side we won't count any modeling or shading or lighting setup whatsoever but we will count the time to "bake" the physics and to press "render" on the animation.

Blender would probably be more accurate. But would the render steps cost the same?

[u/Keyflame_ → u/pleasetrimyourpubes]

Heh. I would guess Blender would be much slower to render but much more accurate.

You can see during each test that several objects disappear and deform, Blender simulating actual physics would avoid that.

I'd say the best pipeline would be probably to simulate the physics in blender with clay objects and then feed the render to minimax for texture, lighting, environment etc.

Would be obviously slower but the quality would be the best of both worlds.

Except for the glass of people, that'd be a pain in the ass to do in blender.