How Sharp Can a 3D Scene Get from Old VR180 Footage (Vuze XR)? Comparing Training Steps and Settings in Spirula Studio

This page contains advertising (affiliate links). See our Privacy Policy for details.

How sharp can a 3D scene get when it is built from footage shot in 2019 with an old VR180 camera (the Vuze XR)? The camera is not current and the pixel count is small by today’s standards.

In this article I used Spirula Studio (software that builds a 3D scene from video or photos) to make a 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) scene from a video of a road at Tofuku-ji in Kyoto (VR180 format, 5760×2880), and compared how it looks as I changed the number of training steps and the settings. I judged the results by how fine they look (crispness of detail, blur, and how few floating bits remain), not by the pixel count of the output.

This is the state as of October 18, 2026. The measurements were finished by the morning of October 18.

Sponsored

Purpose: what I wanted to find out

  • Show how much detail 3DGS can recover from old footage in the 5.7K class.
  • See how much finer the scene gets with 7,500, 15,000, 30,000 and 60,000 training steps.
  • Change one setting at a time to find what affects crispness and floaters (the leftover “debris" in the air).
Sponsored

Method

The source is 45 seconds of a VR180 (side-by-side, 5760×2880) video shot in 2019. The camera was a Vuze XR, confirmed from my shooting records. The Vuze XR is a “2-in-1" VR camera that can shoot both 360° and 180° 3D. In my earlier comparison table on this blog it is listed as shooting 5.7K (5760×2880) at 30 fps. I cut out the left-eye image (2880×2880), converted it into pinhole images in three directions (60° left, front, 60° right; 90° field of view, 1280×1280), and took two frames per second, 270 images in total. People appear only small, and no faces are visible.

  • Software: Spirula Studio 2026.9.24 (the version was not changed during the work). Camera poses with sfm auto, training with train 3dgs.
  • Machine: EVO-X2 (Radeon 8060S, unified memory). I changed one setting at a time.
  • Rendering: from each trained scene I made a 1280×720, 30 fps video along the same camera path, a straight forward move along the road (constant height, looking in the direction of travel, constant speed).
  • Judging the look: I compared enlarged crops of the same spots (pine needles, the text on a sign board, the edge of roof tiles) by eye.
  • PSNR is the average of the last 30 per-image values during training. It fluctuates a lot, so treat it as a reference only, and do not compare it across settings that use different source images.
Sponsored

Result 1: number of training steps

StepsTraining timeSplatsPSNR (reference)
7,5003 min 17 s1,000,00022.44
15,0007 min 37 s1,000,00023.52
30,000 (default)16 min 05 s1,000,00025.57
60,00032 min 36 s1,000,00025.66

Up to 30,000 steps, more steps give a crisper look. From 30,000 to 60,000 steps PSNR barely changes (25.57 to 25.66) and the visible difference is small, while the time doubles.

The same spot rendered after 7,500, 15,000, 30,000 and 60,000 training steps
Top left to bottom right: 7,500, 15,000, 30,000 and 60,000 steps.
Sponsored

Result 2: changing one setting at a time

SettingTraining timeSplatsLook
Learned sky background (--background-mode sh)16 min 52 s1,000,000No big difference in the pine-needle crop
Sky mask, ignored (--apply-loss-for-mask 0)18 min 42 s1,000,000No big difference
Sky mask, treated as empty (--apply-loss-for-mask 1)15 min 21 s1,000,000Worse: the sky turned black and the roof edge broke up
Splat cap 3 million (--cap-max 3000000)34 min 29 s3,000,000Clearly more detail in pine needles and sign text (the biggest effect)
--quality high35 min 03 s3,000,000Same tendency as raising the cap
Source images cut at 1920×192028 min 56 s1,000,000Slightly crisper than the baseline, small difference
Pinhole field of view 60° (about 1.7× pixel density)15 min 49 s1,000,000Slightly crisper than the baseline, small difference
--floater-suppression strong18 min 11 s1,000,000No notable difference
--densify-score-mode max16 min 36 s1,000,000No notable difference
--train-resolution-divisor 210 min 23 s1,000,000Faster to train, slightly softer

The biggest effect came from raising the cap on the number of splats. The floater-suppression setting (strong) had no notable effect on this footage.

Enlarged crops comparing the default and a 3-million splat cap
Enlarged pine needles, sign text and roof tile edge. Left: default (1 million splats). Right: 3 million splats.
Sponsored

Result 3: the highest-quality build

I trained for 30,000 steps with 1920×1920 source images, a 3-million splat cap and --quality high. Training took 54 min 37 s and the file is 705 MB. Roof tile edges and pine needles came close to the detail of the original video frame. The thin text on the sign board was blurrier than in the original frame, and some small floating dots remained.

The same spots in the original video frame and in the highest-quality 3DGS
The same spots, enlarged. Left: the original video frame. Right: the highest-quality 3DGS.
Sponsored

Result 4: floaters (debris left in the air)

Shadow-like smears remain on the road. I think they are traces of passers-by who moved, so their positions did not agree between views.

  • I tried a clean-up after training that removes points with low opacity, points that are too large and points far from the camera positions. A light clean-up (about 130,000 points removed) changed almost nothing. A heavy one (about 1.1 million removed) made holes and dark lumps on the road and made it worse. These floaters are not the kind that disappear by deleting faint points.
  • I also tried training while ignoring people, masked with SAM 3 image by image. 114 of the 270 images contain a person, and the masked area averages 0.39%.
Sponsored

Result 5: person masks and opacity regularization

Setting (added to the highest-quality build)Training timeLook
Ignore person masks (grown by 40 px)55 min 35 sBlack streaks on the road decrease. Dark blurry lumps remain
Ignore person masks (grown by 100 px)53 min 45 sStreaks decrease further, but the foreground becomes a dark haze, which is worse
40 px + opacity-reg 0.02 (4× the default 0.005)58 min 58 sBest. The road ghosts drop a lot and the manhole cover is crisp
40 px + opacity-reg 0.05about 60 minSmoother road, but the wall and sign fade
40 px + floater-suppression mildabout 60 minMore branch-like blur, worse
40 px + opacity-reg 0.02 + distraction-robustness mildabout 60 minDarker than the best, small difference

The most effective combination was the person masks (grown by 40 px) together with an opacity regularization four times the default. If the mask is grown too much, fewer views see that area and the foreground ends up as a dark haze.

Road close-up: highest-quality build, person mask only, and person mask with opacity regularization
Road close-up. From the top: highest-quality build, person mask only, person mask + opacity-reg 0.02.
Straight road path, before and after
Still from the straight road path. Left: highest-quality build. Right: person mask + opacity-reg 0.02.
Straight road path. Left: highest-quality build. Right: person mask + opacity-reg 0.02 (640×360 each).
Wall and gate section, before and after
Still from the wall and gate section. Left: highest-quality build. Right: person mask + opacity-reg 0.02.
Wall and gate section. Left: highest-quality build. Right: person mask + opacity-reg 0.02 (640×360 each).
Sponsored

Discussion: what the results suggest

  • Even old footage in the 5.7K class gives fine roof tiles and leaves once the splat count is raised. Thin text is still blurrier than in the source image.
  • 30,000 steps were enough. The cap on the number of splats mattered more than the number of steps.
  • Part of the shadows on the road came from moving passers-by, and the person masks reduced the black streaks. I think the remaining dark haze comes from few views of the junction surface (not enough coverage).

Limitations: what this test cannot tell you

  • One source video and one place. The ranking may differ for other footage.
  • The look was judged by eye. The only number is the PSNR during training, which is a reference value.
  • The camera (Vuze XR) was confirmed from my shooting records. I did not read the metadata of the video file this time.
  • Each time is a single measurement.

Summary: what raised the quality and what did not

From old footage, raising the splat cap and cutting the source images larger kept details such as roof tiles and leaves in the 3D scene. The traces of passers-by did not disappear with a clean-up after training. Combining person masks with a stronger opacity regularization cut the road ghosts a lot. The dark haze on the junction surface and the blurred thin text remain.

Sponsored