| --- |
| license: other |
| license_name: originlab-noncommercial-research |
| license_link: LICENSE.md |
| task_categories: |
| - depth-estimation |
| - image-to-image |
| tags: |
| - depth |
| - monocular-depth |
| - rgbd |
| - game-engine |
| - dense-ground-truth |
| - pretraining |
| size_categories: |
| - 10K<n<100K |
| pretty_name: Origin Lab Game-Depth (RGB + Dense Z-Buffer) |
| configs: |
| - config_name: default |
| data_files: |
| - split: train |
| path: data/train-*.parquet |
| - split: test |
| path: data/test-*.parquet |
| - split: extra |
| path: data/extra-*.parquet |
| --- |
| |
| <p align="center"> |
| <img src="https://huggingface.co/datasets/originlab/game-depth/resolve/main/assets/logo.png" alt="OriginLab" width="320"> |
| </p> |
|
|
| # Origin Lab Game-Depth: RGB + Dense Z-Buffer Depth |
|
|
| Dense depth from game engines, as a scalable substitute for scarce real depth ground truth. |
|
|
| Depth is one of ten frame-locked modalities Origin Lab captures in-engine (pre- and post-HUD RGB, depth, |
| surface normals, camera pose, keyboard/mouse inputs, in-engine events, game state, audio, and per-frame |
| training tables) - this release isolates the depth channel; the full multimodal corpus is |
| [`originlab/game-recordings-v3`](https://huggingface.co/datasets/originlab/game-recordings-v3). All |
| gameplay is captured under non-exclusive licenses with the rights holders by consenting, compensated |
| players. The engine measures absolute geometry: this release ships relative log-nearness, and metric depth |
| is the next release. |
|
|
| Website: [originlab.ai](https://originlab.ai) |
|
|
| **Data:** this repo (load with `load_dataset("originlab/game-depth")`).<br> |
| **Models / checkpoints:** [`originlab/lotus-game-depth`](https://huggingface.co/originlab/lotus-game-depth). |
|
|
| ## Abstract |
|
|
| Dense depth ground truth is the bottleneck in monocular depth estimation. Real sensors are sparse, noisy, |
| or indoor-only, and purpose-built synthetic datasets are expensive and narrow. Game engines already render |
| a dense, exact z-buffer for every frame, for free. We ask whether that signal can stand in for real data. |
| Training a depth model from scratch on ~17.8k game frames, roughly a quarter of the synthetic corpus behind |
| the Lotus baseline, we find it transfers to real outdoor scenes better than that baseline (KITTI AbsRel |
| 0.191 vs 0.224). The comparison is against the publicly released Lotus checkpoint, trained by its authors |
| under their own schedule - a released-baseline comparison, not a controlled retrain. Indoor scenes remain |
| this dataset's frontier. The reason is geometric rather than cosmetic: the |
| game corpus teaches an outdoor ground-plane structure that real driving data shares, even though its pixels |
| look nothing alike. We therefore position game z-buffers as a scalable pre-training substrate, a cheap |
| geometric prior for initializing models before fine-tuning on limited real data, rather than a replacement |
| for real data. |
|
|
| ## Dataset structure |
|
|
| Each example is one RGB frame paired with dense depth from the engine z-buffer: |
|
|
| - `image` : RGB frame (1080x1920), PNG. |
| - `depth_nearness` : relative log-nearness stored as a 16-bit PNG. Decode with |
| `nearness = numpy.array(x) / 65535.0` (in [0,1], near = 1). This is relative, not metric. |
| - `valid` : per-pixel validity mask (0 or 255). Game z-buffers are fully dense, so for this dataset |
| every pixel is valid and the mask is all-255 (appears all-white in the Viewer). It is included only |
| for format compatibility with real-sensor depth datasets, which have holes; you can ignore it here. |
| - `game`, `session`, `frame`, `split` : metadata. |
|
|
| Splits (48,615 frames total): |
|
|
| - `train` (17,799) : the session-capped, stride-sampled curated training split used in the results below. |
| - `test` (999) : session-disjoint held-out test set. |
| - `extra` (29,815) : the remaining frames. Do not evaluate on `extra` - it shares sessions with `train`. |
| Released so you can build your own curation instead of ours. |
|
|
| ### Usage |
|
|
| ```python |
| from datasets import load_dataset |
| import numpy as np |
| |
| ds = load_dataset("originlab/game-depth", split="train", streaming=True) |
| ex = next(iter(ds)) |
| rgb = ex["image"] # PIL RGB |
| nearness = np.array(ex["depth_nearness"]).astype("float32") / 65535.0 # [0,1], near = 1 (relative) |
| valid = np.array(ex["valid"]) > 0 |
| ``` |
|
|
| ## 1. Depth data is the bottleneck |
|
|
| Every monocular-depth model is limited by the depth labels it can learn from. LiDAR is sparse and costly; |
| structured-light sensors are indoor-only and noisy; pseudo-labels inherit a teacher's blind spots. |
| Synthetic datasets such as Hypersim and Virtual KITTI give dense, exact depth, which is why the strongest |
| open diffusion-depth models train on them, but they are hand-authored, fixed in size, and narrow in domain |
| (photoreal interiors, or a driving simulator). |
|
|
| Game engines sidestep the labeling problem entirely: the z-buffer that produces every rendered frame is |
| dense per-pixel depth, available at capture time at no additional cost. Unlike a curated synthetic dataset, |
| game capture is open-ended across any title, session, or environment, so the supply of dense depth grows |
| with recording rather than with annotation budget. The question this card answers is whether depth learned |
| from that source actually transfers to the real world. |
|
|
| ## 2. A depth dataset from game engines |
|
|
| The dataset is 48,615 RGB frames (1080x1920) from 10 games across 98 sessions, each paired with dense |
| per-pixel depth from the engine z-buffer (stored as log-nearness, `near = 1 - luma/65535`; relative, not |
| metric). Splits are session-disjoint, so no scene leaks between train and test. Frames are stride-sampled to |
| cut the temporal redundancy of contiguous gameplay (raw 3-fps extraction is about 21% near-duplicates; the |
| sampled training split about 8%), and the training split is session-capped so no single session dominates. |
| The composition is deliberately outdoor-heavy and 0% indoor, a fact that turns out to explain most of the |
| results below. A per-game breakdown is in Section 8. |
|
|
| The comparison that frames the rest of the card is with the data behind the Lotus baseline: |
|
|
| | | Lotus training data | This dataset (ours) | |
| |---|---|---| |
| | Sources | Hypersim + Virtual KITTI (2 curated datasets) | 10 commercial games, 98 sessions | |
| | Train size | about 74k (54k + 20k) | 48,615 total; 17,799 used here | |
| | Origin | purpose-built renders / driving sim | off-the-shelf gameplay capture | |
| | Scenes | indoor + road | outdoor: forest, off-road, driving, FPS, party | |
| | Depth GT | metric | relative log-nearness | |
| | Scaling | fixed datasets | grows with capture, not labeling | |
|
|
| Our model is trained from scratch on roughly 4x fewer frames, entirely from games. That the resulting model |
| is competitive at all is the first hint that the signal is dense and clean enough to matter. |
|
|
| ## 3. Game depth transfers to real outdoor scenes |
|
|
| The central test is zero-shot transfer to a real benchmark the model never saw. On KITTI (1000-image |
| annotated validation set), evaluated in a single fixed harness, the game-trained model has the lowest error |
| of the diffusion-family models: |
|
|
| | Model (zero-shot) | AbsRel (lower better) | delta1 (higher better) | |
| |---|---|---| |
| | Ours (game, from scratch) | 0.191 | 0.720 | |
| | Lotus (released) | 0.224 | 0.585 | |
| | Marigold | 0.244 | 0.570 | |
| | Depth-Anything-V2 (real-data reference) | 0.075 | 0.947 | |
|
|
| The gap is statistically clear, not noise: 95% bootstrap confidence intervals are [0.189, 0.194] for ours |
| and [0.221, 0.226] for Lotus, which do not overlap. These intervals cover test-set sampling only, not |
| run-to-run training variance; all results are single-seed. One confound should be named plainly: Lotus |
| trains on 54k indoor frames plus 20k driving-sim frames while our training data is 0% indoor, so this |
| result is equally consistent with "domain match wins" as with "game data wins" - the outdoor-only control |
| (ours vs Virtual KITTI alone at matched size, Section 7) will settle which. |
|
|
| A model that has only ever seen rendered game frames predicts real outdoor depth more accurately than one |
| trained on purpose-built synthetic data, and it does so on real photographs, which tells us synthetic-RGB |
| fidelity is not the limiting factor. The advantage is not superficial: it is strongest exactly where outdoor |
| scene understanding lives, on the receding ground plane and at long range, and it holds when noisy boundary |
| pixels are removed, so it reflects structure the model understands rather than sensor noise it happens to |
| fit. Depth-Anything-V2, a discriminative model trained on massive labeled real data, sits far ahead of all |
| diffusion models; it is a reference ceiling, not a same-recipe competitor. |
|
|
|  |
|
|
| Zero-shot KITTI predictions across models (inverse-depth visualization; near bright, far dark; selected |
| examples). The game-trained model recovers road geometry and vehicles cleanly, ahead of the other diffusion |
| models on these frames. Depth-Anything-V2 (the real-data reference) remains strongest overall (Table above). |
|
|
| ## 4. The mechanism: geometry, not appearance |
|
|
| Why would game frames transfer to real driving scenes? The intuitive guess, that the game RGB simply looks |
| like KITTI, is wrong, and measuring it is what makes the real explanation clear. |
|
|
| Embedding every image with DINOv2 and comparing distributions, the game data is in fact closest in |
| appearance to indoor NYU, not outdoor KITTI: |
|
|
| | Pair | DINOv2 Frechet distance | |
| |---|---| |
| | game vs NYU | 0.98 | |
| | game vs KITTI | 1.32 | |
|
|
| If appearance drove transfer, the model would do best on NYU, the opposite of what happens. What the game |
| data actually shares with KITTI is 3-D structure. Measuring the ground-plane signature of each dataset, how |
| strongly distance increases from the bottom of the image to the top, the game corpus looks outdoor: its |
| per-image ground-plane strength (median rho) clusters near KITTI (-0.79 vs -0.82) and far from indoor NYU |
| (-0.56). |
|
|
|  |
|
|
| A depth model learns geometry, not texture, so the game corpus hands it an outdoor ground-plane prior that |
| happens to be exactly right for real driving scenes and exactly wrong for cluttered interiors. This single |
| mechanism explains the whole pattern of results: the outdoor win, the indoor gap, and the value of the data |
| as a prior. This is a correlation grounded in the mechanism a monocular depth model actually learns; a |
| direct causal test (holding the game RGB fixed while destroying the depth geometry and measuring the drop |
| in transfer) is described as future work in Section 7. |
|
|
| ## 5. Indoor is the frontier |
|
|
| The same prior that wins outdoors is a liability indoors. With no indoor frames in training, NYU is out of |
| distribution, and the model loses zero-shot (AbsRel 0.149 vs Lotus 0.133). Fine-tuning on real NYU closes |
| the gap. Under a matched learning-rate sweep (best checkpoint for each initialization), the game-pretrained |
| model reaches AbsRel 0.116, statistically tied with the fine-tuned Lotus baseline (0.115), despite having no |
| indoor data and roughly 4x less pre-training. We take the honest reading: indoor performance needs indoor |
| data, and here game-pretraining matches, rather than beats, a curated-synthetic baseline. That parity is |
| still a useful data-efficiency result, and it maps where the approach helps today (outdoor geometry) and |
| where the next dataset version has to grow (indoor and more varied scenes). |
|
|
| | Model | NYU AbsRel, zero-shot | NYU AbsRel, + NYU fine-tune | |
| |---|---|---| |
| | Ours (game, from scratch) | 0.149 | 0.116 | |
| | Lotus (released) | 0.133 | 0.115 | |
| | Marigold | 0.197 | not fine-tuned | |
| | Depth-Anything-V2 (real-data reference) | 0.055 | not fine-tuned | |
|
|
| (654-image Eigen test, cap 10 m, lower is better. Fine-tuned numbers use the matched learning-rate sweep, |
| best checkpoint per initialization; ours and Lotus are statistically tied.) |
|
|
|  |
|
|
| Game pre-training alone is weak indoors (third column, zero-shot: the outdoor prior is out of distribution |
| for cluttered rooms), but it is a strong starting point. Fine-tuning on real NYU recovers the room layout |
| and furniture (fourth column). Selected examples with the largest zero-shot-to-fine-tuned improvement. |
|
|
| An earlier comparison at a single higher learning rate had suggested a larger game-pretraining advantage; |
| that turned out to be an under-tuned Lotus baseline, which the matched sweep corrects. We report the |
| matched, fair numbers. |
|
|
|  |
|
|
| NYU predictions with both models fine-tuned on real NYU under an identical fine-tune recipe applied to both initializations (selected examples). |
| The game-pretrained model produces indoor depth as close to the ground truth as the fine-tuned Lotus |
| baseline, consistent with the tied metrics above. |
|
|
| ## 6. What this is: a scalable pre-training substrate |
|
|
| Read together, the results describe a specific and useful role for game-engine depth. It is not a |
| replacement for real data; Depth-Anything-V2, trained on real labels, is far more accurate on the |
| real-world benchmarks. It is a cheap, scalable geometric prior: dense and exact, free at capture time, and, as the KITTI result shows, |
| carrying structure that transfers to the real world. The natural use is to pre-train on game depth and then |
| fine-tune on whatever small real dataset a task allows, getting the benefit of a strong prior without the |
| cost of collecting real dense depth. |
|
|
| Two in-domain observations reinforce this. First, the pre-training learns genuine structure: on held-out |
| game frames our model predicts depth well ahead of Lotus. Second, and more telling, the real-data model |
| that dominates the benchmarks is the weakest on our frames, which means the data carries structure that |
| existing models have not already absorbed. |
|
|
| | Model on our game test set | SSI-MAE (lower better) | AbsRel | |
| |---|---|---| |
| | Ours (game) | 0.029 | 0.050 | |
| | Lotus | 0.035 | 0.064 | |
| | Marigold | 0.041 | 0.074 | |
| | Depth-Anything-V2 (real-data SOTA elsewhere) | 0.055 | 0.098 | |
|
|
| ## 7. Where this goes (v0.3.0) |
|
|
| - Data-scaling curve: accuracy across roughly 2k to 48.6k frames, step-matched - the direct test of |
| whether accuracy is still climbing with capture. |
| - Outdoor-only synthetic control: ours vs Virtual KITTI alone at matched size, to separate "domain match |
| wins" from "game data wins" on KITTI. |
| - Coverage: indoor and more varied scenes, to convert the indoor frontier into a strength. |
| - Causal test: a depth-corruption ablation (holding RGB fixed, destroying the depth geometry, and measuring |
| the drop in transfer) to move the geometry mechanism from correlation to causation. |
| - Confidence: multi-seed variance and confidence intervals on every headline number. |
|
|
| ## 8. Dataset composition |
|
|
| The training split (17,799 frames) spans 10 games; no single game dominates. The held-out game test set |
| (999 frames) is session-disjoint and drawn from 5 of the games. |
|
|
| | Game | Train frames | Train % | Test frames | |
| |---|---|---|---| |
| | Game1 | 1,600 | 9.0 | 0 | |
| | Game2 | 2,000 | 11.2 | 200 | |
| | Game3 | 1,600 | 9.0 | 0 | |
| | Game4 | 2,000 | 11.2 | 200 | |
| | Game5 | 800 | 4.5 | 200 | |
| | Game6 | 1,400 | 7.9 | 200 | |
| | Game8 | 2,000 | 11.2 | 200 | |
| | Game9 | 2,800 | 15.7 | 0 | |
| | Game10 | 1,800 | 10.1 | 0 | |
| | Game11 | 1,800 | 10.1 | 0 | |
| | Total | 17,799 | 100 | 999 | |
|
|
| Full corpus before session-capping and the train split is 48,615 frames. Machine-readable counts in |
| [`results/game_distribution.json`](results/game_distribution.json). |
|
|
| ## Released models |
|
|
| Both models trained with this dataset are released (same license) in one repo: **[`originlab/lotus-game-depth`](https://huggingface.co/originlab/lotus-game-depth)** - the game-pretrained checkpoint (`pretrained/`, zero-shot KITTI 0.191) and the NYU fine-tuned checkpoint (`nyu-ft/`, NYU 0.116). Load with `UNet2DConditionModel.from_pretrained('originlab/lotus-game-depth', subfolder='pretrained/unet')`. |
|
|
| ## Methodology and scope |
|
|
| Full detail in [`METHODOLOGY.md`](METHODOLOGY.md); machine-readable metrics (including per-frame) in |
| [`results/`](results/). In brief: all models run through one harness with per-model output conventions |
| handled explicitly, and predictions aligned to ground truth by least-squares scale-shift. The harness is |
| validated by Depth-Anything-V2 reproducing its published NYU number (about 0.055). KITTI is processed at |
| native resolution for every model identically, because its roughly 3.4:1 frames are otherwise squashed and |
| blurred. Ours shares the Lotus architecture and training recipe, but the headline comparison is against the |
| publicly released Lotus checkpoint trained by its authors under their own schedule - we did not retrain |
| Lotus, so this is a released-baseline comparison, not a controlled same-recipe experiment. Marigold and |
| Depth-Anything-V2 are external checkpoints included as reference points, with inference settings |
| disclosed. Depth only; normals |
| are out of scope. Point estimates are single-seed; multi-seed variance is noted as future work in Section 7. |
|
|
| Training footprint: the trained component is the SD2-base UNet (about 0.87B trainable parameters; VAE and |
| text encoder frozen), run for 6000 steps at effective batch 32, so roughly 192k images are seen, about 11 |
| passes over the 17,799-frame split. Compute cost is a separate axis from data amount: under a step-matched |
| budget it stays fixed as the data is scaled down, so the data-utilization question (whether accuracy keeps |
| rising with more data) is answered by the data-scaling curve in Section 7, not by compute; the only coupling |
| is that smaller fractions imply more passes over the data (a memorization caveat for those points). |
|
|
| ## License |
|
|
| Open access, two license tracks ([`LICENSE.md`](LICENSE.md)) - downloading constitutes acceptance: |
|
|
| - **Internal Evaluation License**: 90-day internal evaluation - no publication or release obligation, no |
| deployment or production use. Built so a research team can test the signal quietly and convert |
| commercially. |
| - **Research License**: non-commercial research with a **model-release requirement** (any model trained on |
| this data must be publicly released with open weights and a model card). |
|
|
| No redistribution of the raw data without consent; commercial or production use requires a separate |
| agreement (contact Origin Lab at https://app.originlab.ai). Access is open - downloading constitutes |
| acceptance of the license; state your track when you contact us to convert. |
|
|
| ## References |
|
|
| 1. N. Silberman, D. Hoiem, P. Kohli, R. Fergus. "Indoor Segmentation and Support Inference from RGBD |
| Images." ECCV, 2012. (NYU Depth V2) |
| 2. A. Geiger, P. Lenz, R. Urtasun. "Are We Ready for Autonomous Driving? The KITTI Vision Benchmark Suite." |
| CVPR, 2012. A. Geiger, P. Lenz, C. Stiller, R. Urtasun. "Vision Meets Robotics: The KITTI Dataset." |
| IJRR, 2013. |
| 3. M. Roberts, J. Ramapuram, A. Ranjan, et al. "Hypersim: A Photorealistic Synthetic Dataset for Holistic |
| Indoor Scene Understanding." ICCV, 2021. |
| 4. A. Gaidon, Q. Wang, Y. Cabon, E. Vig. "Virtual Worlds as Proxy for Multi-Object Tracking Analysis." |
| CVPR, 2016. Y. Cabon, N. Murray, M. Humenberger. "Virtual KITTI 2." arXiv:2001.10773, 2020. |
| 5. J. He, H. Li, W. Yin, et al. "Lotus: Diffusion-based Visual Foundation Model for High-quality Dense |
| Prediction." arXiv:2409.18124, 2024. |
| 6. B. Ke, A. Obukhov, S. Huang, N. Metzger, R. C. Daudt, K. Schindler. "Repurposing Diffusion-Based Image |
| Generators for Monocular Depth Estimation (Marigold)." CVPR, 2024. |
| 7. L. Yang, B. Kang, Z. Huang, Z. Zhao, X. Xu, J. Feng, H. Zhao. "Depth Anything V2." NeurIPS, 2024. |
| arXiv:2406.09414. |
| 8. M. Oquab, T. Darcet, T. Moutakanni, et al. "DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without |
| Supervision." TMLR, 2023. |
|
|
| ## Citation |
|
|
| ```bibtex |
| @misc{originlab2026gamedepth, |
| title = {Origin Lab Game-Depth: RGB + Dense Z-Buffer Depth}, |
| author = {Origin Lab}, |
| year = {2026}, |
| url = {https://app.originlab.ai} |
| } |
| ``` |
|
|