Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

PostCam: Camera-Controllable Novel-View Video Generation with Query-Shared Cross-Attention

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Fusing pose and rendered video through one shared query sharpens camera control in novel-view video generation by over 20%.

desk verdict PostCam's shared-query cross-attention and two-stage training look like a genuine step forward for camera-controllable video generation, but the VGGT-based camera metric means the "over 20%" improvement claim isn't established yet. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.17185 v2 pith:IUKOISYD submitted 2025-11-21 cs.CV

Yipeng Chen , Zhichao Ye , Zhenzhou Fang , Xinyu Chen , Xiaoyu Zhang , Jialing Liu , Nan Wang , Guofeng Zhang
show 1 more author
Haomin Liu
This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords novel-viewvideogenerationcamera-controllablediffusioncross-attention6-DoFposeconditioningrendereddynamicscenestwo-stagetraining
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

The paper argues that precise camera control in novel-view video generation comes from deeply aligning two control signals — numeric 6-DoF camera poses and rendered proxy frames — rather than from adding more inputs. It introduces PostCam, which injects both modalities through a single query-shared cross-attention module, so the denoising process can pick the most relevant cues from each. Two-stage training first teaches the model camera motion from poses alone, then refines it with rendered visuals, avoiding the convergence problems that arise when both signals enter at once. The claimed payoff: over 20 percent better trajectory precision and view consistency than existing methods on real and synthetic dynamic scenes, with fine visual details like faces and hands preserved. If true, the work gives videographers a practical way to re-shoot camera moves after capture without degrading the picture.

What carries the argument

Query-Shared Cross-Attention: a cross-attention layer where the noised-latent query is shared, while keys and values from the 6-DoF pose embedding and the rendered video are concatenated along the token dimension before the softmax. Because the same query must attend to both modalities, the model is forced to distill common camera-motion cues and suppress modality-specific noise; the zero-initialized projector and the two-stage pose-first training schedule (pose-only first, pose-plus-render second) are what make this alignment learnable.

What would settle it

On synthetic videos with known camera paths, compute RotErr and TransErr both from the ground-truth poses and from the feed-forward estimator, and check whether the estimator's errors correlate with how much source-appearance detail a method preserves; if the >20% advantage shrinks under ground-truth pose comparison, or if the estimator's error is larger for outputs that discard source detail, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

PostCam claims that the long-standing trade-off in novel-view video generation — pose control without visual detail versus rendering guidance that breaks under depth errors — can be dissolved by modality alignment rather than more input complexity. In each transformer block, a single query attends jointly to keys and values from the camera-pose embedding and from a downsampled rendered video, letting the model weigh which signal matters for each token during denoising. The rendered stream's job is narrowed to refining motion accuracy and visual fidelity, which is why the model still produces correct motion when depth maps are so bad that the rendered proxy collapses. Combined with a pose-fir

Load-bearing premise

The strong empirical claim depends on the assumption that the learned feed-forward trajectory estimator used on real videos is an unbiased measure of true camera motion, even though no ground-truth trajectory exists there.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Camera trajectories of captured videos can be edited after the fact along arbitrary user paths while preserving high-fidelity appearance, including in dynamic scenes.
  • Because the rendered video is only a coarse motion-and-appearance prior, the method tolerates poor monocular depth; severe distortion in the render does not break the generated motion.
  • The added trainable parameters are small — a camera encoder, cross-attention, and projector — so the approach runs on a lightweight 1.3B-parameter backbone and is cheap to deploy.
  • The two-stage recipe gives a concrete answer to why naive multi-modal conditioning fails: simultaneous injection of pose and render signals delays convergence, while pose-first learning avoids the conflict.
  • Both camera-parameter (rotation-translation) and Plücker-coordinate pose representations work through the same shared-query design, so the mechanism is not tied to a specific pose encoding.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper measures real-scene trajectory accuracy with a learned feed-forward estimator because classic structure-from-motion fails in dynamic scenes; if that estimator rewards outputs that retain source appearance, the reported >20% precision gain could be partly a measurement artifact rather than true camera control. A synthetic ground-truth trajectory test would settle this.
  • The shared-query design is a general recipe for fusing heterogeneous conditioning signals, so it likely transfers to other multi-modal controls such as object motion + camera, or depth + text, in video diffusion.
  • Downsampling the rendered video works because the shared query learns to read coarse visual cues; an appealing extension is to make the render resolution an adjustable knob trading control granularity against compute.
  • If estimator bias is real, the field's standard evaluation of dynamic-camera video generation needs a benchmark with ground-truth trajectories, e.g. ray-traced synthetic scenes, rather than proxy estimation.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes PostCam, a framework for camera-controllable novel-view video generation from a source video and a target 6-DoF trajectory. Its central contribution is a query-shared cross-attention module that jointly injects camera-pose embeddings and a rendered-video condition into a frozen Wan2.1 diffusion transformer, alongside a two-stage training strategy (pose-only first, then joint with rendered video). The method is evaluated on real-world OpenVid clips and a synthetic dataset against ReCamMaster, TrajectoryCrafter, and DaS, reporting improvements in RotErr/TransErr, VBench video-quality scores, and FID/FVD. The authors claim over 20% improvement in camera-control precision and view consistency.

Significance. If the empirical results are reliable, PostCam is a useful empirical contribution: it shows that a simple shared-query attention mechanism over two heterogeneous control modalities (numerical poses and rendered visuals) can improve trajectory control without added input complexity or heavy parameter overhead. The paper includes systematic ablations (Tables 3–5) isolating the conditioning strategy, attention-injection mechanism, and training order, which is a strength and aids reproducibility. However, the central >20% claim rests on a camera-accuracy metric that uses VGGT pose estimates without validation on known trajectories, and all quantitative comparisons are single point estimates with no uncertainty quantification. These issues must be addressed before the claim is convincing.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Evaluation Metrics (Camera Accuracy)] The headline camera-control claim depends entirely on VGGT, a learned feed-forward reconstruction model, to estimate trajectories of generated videos. On the real-world OpenVid set there is no ground-truth trajectory; on the synthetic set ground-truth trajectories are known, but the paper does not report VGGT's pose-estimation error on those GT videos. Since VGGT estimates can be biased toward videos that preserve sharp appearance details—which PostCam is designed to do—the reported RotErr/TransErr improvements could partly reflect measurement bias rather than true control precision. The manuscript mentions a supplementary comparison of trajectory estimators but does not include it in the main text. Please provide a validation table showing VGGT's RotErr/TransErr on the synthetic GT videos (or on a held-out set with known trajectories), and/or an independent trajectory estimator, to rule
  2. [Tables 1–5 (all quantitative comparisons)] All metrics are single point estimates with no standard deviations, confidence intervals, or significance tests. The test sets are small (100–1000 samples), and the claimed improvements—e.g., Table 1 RotErr 0.0649→0.0501, FID 85.68→67.20; Table 2 FID 103.74→80.29—could fall within run-to-run variance. The paper's conclusion uses the word "significant" without statistical support. Please report mean±std over multiple training runs or seeds, or at least provide bootstrap confidence intervals for the key comparisons, so the reader can assess whether the >20% margins are robust.
  3. [§4.1, View Consistency metric] The paper defines "view consistency" as FID and FVD computed between the generated video and the source (real-world set) or GT target (synthetic set). FID/FVD are distribution-level fidelity measures, not view-consistency metrics; they do not measure the spatial/temporal correspondence of novel views. The repeated claim of "over 20% improvement in view consistency" is therefore based on a conflation of two distinct notions. Either rename the metric to "distribution fidelity" or use an established view-consistency metric (e.g., feature-based cross-view matching, estimated depth/point-cloud consistency) to support the claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§1] "hardly to preserve fine visual details" should be reworded to "often fails to preserve" or "hardly preserves."
  2. [Throughout] The method name is inconsistently spelled: "ReCamMaster" appears in most places but "RecamMaster" appears in Section 4.1 and elsewhere. Please unify.
  3. [§3.4, Eqs. (4)–(6)] The equations contain formatting artifacts (e.g., "token-dimp", "softmax" line breaks). Please clean up the LaTeX/PDF rendering.
  4. [Figure 5 caption] The caption contains a stray line of "dddddddddddddddddd" that appears to be a formatting artifact and should be removed.
  5. [Abstract and Conclusion] The phrase "over 20% significant improvement" is ambiguous: "significant" may be interpreted statistically. Since no significance tests are reported, consider rewording to "over 20% improvement" or provide statistical evidence.
  6. [§4.2, Baselines] DaS is an image-to-video model, not a video-to-video recapture model. Including it in the main comparison is somewhat unfair because it is not designed to preserve source-video content. If kept, the paper should clearly mark which baselines are I2V and which are V2V, or move DaS to a supplementary comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: PostCam's claims derive from a standard flow-matching training objective and are evaluated against external metrics; the VGGT trajectory estimate is an external measurement, not a model-fitted prediction.

full rationale

PostCam is an empirical system paper rather than a mathematical derivation. The central mechanism (query-shared cross-attention, Eqs. 4-5) is defined as a model architecture and trained with a standard flow-matching objective (Eq. 3); no predicted quantity is reconstructed from the same fitted parameter used to evaluate it. The rendered video is a conditioning input produced offline from the source video and target camera trajectory, not an output of the model, so there is no self-definitional loop. Camera accuracy is measured by comparing ground-truth poses against trajectories estimated by VGGT, a third-party feed-forward reconstruction model; although this metric may carry a content-dependent bias favoring appearance-preserving outputs, that is a measurement-validity question, not a circularity: VGGT's weights were not trained on PostCam outputs or fitted to the reported differences. Video quality and view consistency are assessed with external VBench, FID, and FVD. The only apparent self-citation (Ref. [41], Stargen) is not load-bearing: it appears in the reference list without underlying the paper's main claims, and no uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or fitted parameter is imported from the authors' prior work. The qualitative claim of 'intrinsic consistency' is an interpretation of the architecture, not a derived result. Hence no specific circular step can be quoted, and the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

The central claim rests on standard ML machinery (diffusion/flow matching, attention), plus two domain assumptions about the input pipeline (monocular depth rendering) and the evaluation pipeline (VGGT trajectory estimation), plus the standard synthetic-to-real transfer assumption. No new physical entities, constants, or invented objects are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Flow matching and diffusion transformer training (Eqs. 1-2) provide a valid generative backbone.
    The method inherits Wan2.1's flow-matching objective; this is a standard, well-established mathematical framework.
  • domain assumption A monocular depth estimator produces a point cloud that can be reprojected into a usable rendered video (Sec. 3.3).
    The rendered video is key to the second conditioning modality. The specific depth model is not named, and the paper only argues qualitatively that depth errors are tolerated.
  • domain assumption VGGT (or a similar feed-forward method) provides sufficiently unbiased camera-trajectory estimates for dynamic generated videos (Sec. 4.1).
    All camera-accuracy numbers, especially for the real-world set, rely on this estimator. No validation against ground-truth trajectories is provided for real videos, so estimator bias could confound the headline improvement.
  • domain assumption Training on ReCamMaster's synthetic dataset transfers to real-world OpenVid clips (Sec. 4.1).
    The model is trained only on synthetic paired data, yet the central claim includes real-world performance; the paper assumes this sim-to-real transfer without studying its limits.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PostCam: Camera-Controllable Novel-View Video Generation with Query-Shared Cross-Attention." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IUKOISYD

@misc{pith2026251117185,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PostCam: Camera-Controllable Novel-View Video Generation with Query-Shared Cross-Attention},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IUKOISYD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.17185}
}
read the original abstract

We propose PostCam, a streamlined framework for novel-view video generation that achieves superior detail preservation and precise camera trajectory editing in dynamic scenes. Current methods often struggle with a trade-off between pose-based control, which lacks visual detail, and rendering-based guidance, which is overly sensitive to geometric accuracy. Despite recent hybrid attempts, achieving precise motion and visual consistency remains challenging due to the lack of effective cross-modal alignment. We argue that robust control stems from the deep alignment of multimodal signals rather than increased input complexity. Our core contribution is the Query-Shared Cross-Attention mechanism, which projects 6-DoF poses and rendered features into a unified latent space. This allows the model to spontaneously achieve intrinsic consistency between motion cues and pixel-level guidance during denoising. Experiments demonstrate that PostCam maintains high-fidelity visual details while outperforming state-of-the-art methods by 20% in trajectory precision, exhibiting superior robustness in complex dynamic scenes. Our project webpage is publicly available at: https://cccqaq.github.io/PostCam.github.io/

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.17185 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Given a source video (left) and a target camera trajectory (middle), PostCam generates high-quality novel-view videos (right), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison with State-of-the-Art Methods in Real Dynamic Scenes. We compare the last-frame results of state-of￾the-art (SOTA) methods and our approach, with the last frame of the source video shown in the first column for reference. Across all examples, our method consistently preserves fine details (e.g., faces, hands), while SOTA methods often suffer from blurring, dis￾tortion, and identity drift. Moreover, our ap… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison results. We compare our method against SOTA (column 3,4,5,6) under specific camera motions (column 2, showing direction and render). Source frames (initial, middle, final) are in column 1. Das, an I2V model, fails to generate coherent results. Tr…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparisons under different conditions. Our method achieves faithful preservation of fine details and more accurate background generation while ensuring accurate camera motion control. The red boxes highlight that, even when distortions oc￾cur in the rendered views, on…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. CameraAnything: Refilming Videos with Arbitrary Camera Control

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A video diffusion editor jointly controls extrinsic pose, multi-shot cuts, focal length, and native resolution via Plücker rays in resolution-aware 3D RoPE, trained on synthetic multi-camera pairs.

  2. MVTrack4Gen: Multi-View Point Tracking as Geometric Supervision for 4D Video Generation

    cs.CV 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    MVTrack4Gen uses multi-view point tracking as geometric and motion supervision for camera-conditioning-only novel-view video diffusion models to improve consistency.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 30 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Vd3d: Taming large video diffu- sion transformers for 3d camera control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.12781, 2024

    Sherwin Bahmani, Ivan Skorokhodov, Aliaksandr Siaro- hin, Willi Menapace, Guocheng Qian, Michael Vasilkovsky, Hsin-Ying Lee, Chaoyang Wang, Jiaxu Zou, Andrea Tagliasacchi, et al. Vd3d: Taming large video diffu- sion transformers for 3d camera control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.12781, 2024. 3

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Ac3d: Analyzing and improving 3d camera control in video diffusion trans- formers

    Sherwin Bahmani, Ivan Skorokhodov, Guocheng Qian, Ali- aksandr Siarohin, Willi Menapace, Andrea Tagliasacchi, David B Lindell, and Sergey Tulyakov. Ac3d: Analyzing and improving 3d camera control in video diffusion trans- formers. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 22875–22889, 2025. 3

    2025

  3. [3]

    Recammaster: Camera-controlled generative rendering from a single video.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.11647, 2025

    Jianhong Bai, Menghan Xia, Xiao Fu, Xintao Wang, Lian- rui Mu, Jinwen Cao, Zuozhu Liu, Haoji Hu, Xiang Bai, Pengfei Wan, et al. Recammaster: Camera-controlled generative rendering from a single video.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.11647, 2025. 3, 5, 6

    arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Gs-dit: Advancing video generation with pseudo 4d gaussian fields through efficient dense 3d point tracking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.02690,

    Weikang Bian, Zhaoyang Huang, Xiaoyu Shi, Yijin Li, Fu- Yun Wang, and Hongsheng Li. Gs-dit: Advancing video generation with pseudo 4d gaussian fields through efficient dense 3d point tracking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.02690,

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023

    Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram V oleti, Adam Letts, et al. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023. 3

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Video generation models as world simulators.OpenAI Blog, 1:8, 2024

    Tim Brooks, Bill Peebles, Connor Holmes, Will DePue, Yufei Guo, Li Jing, David Schnurr, Joe Taylor, Troy Luh- man, Eric Luhman, et al. Video generation models as world simulators.OpenAI Blog, 1:8, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  7. [7]

    Mvgenmaster: Scaling multi-view generation from any image via 3d priors enhanced diffusion model

    Chenjie Cao, Chaohui Yu, Shang Liu, Fan Wang, Xiangyang Xue, and Yanwei Fu. Mvgenmaster: Scaling multi-view generation from any image via 3d priors enhanced diffusion model. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 6045–6056, 2025. 2, 3, 7

    2025

  8. [8]

    Uni3c: Unifying precisely 3d-enhanced camera and hu- man motion controls for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.14899, 2025

    Chenjie Cao, Jingkai Zhou, Shikai Li, Jingyun Liang, Chaohui Yu, Fan Wang, Xiangyang Xue, and Yanwei Fu. Uni3c: Unifying precisely 3d-enhanced camera and hu- man motion controls for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.14899, 2025. 2, 3, 7

    arXiv 2025

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    I2vcontrol-camera: Precise video camera control with adjustable motion strength.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.06525, 2024

    Wanquan Feng, Jiawei Liu, Pengqi Tu, Tianhao Qi, Mingzhen Sun, Tianxiang Ma, Songtao Zhao, Siyu Zhou, and Qian He. I2vcontrol-camera: Precise video camera control with adjustable motion strength.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.06525, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Diffusion as shader: 3d-aware video diffu- sion for versatile video generation control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03847, 2025

    Zekai Gu, Rui Yan, Jiahao Lu, Peng Li, Zhiyang Dou, Chenyang Si, Zhen Dong, Qifeng Liu, Cheng Lin, Ziwei Liu, et al. Diffusion as shader: 3d-aware video diffu- sion for versatile video generation control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03847, 2025. 3, 6

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Animatediff: Animate your personalized text- to-image diffusion models without specific tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04725, 2023

    Yuwei Guo, Ceyuan Yang, Anyi Rao, Zhengyang Liang, Yaohui Wang, Yu Qiao, Maneesh Agrawala, Dahua Lin, and Bo Dai. Animatediff: Animate your personalized text- to-image diffusion models without specific tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04725, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Cameractrl: Enabling camera control for text-to-video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02101, 2024

    Hao He, Yinghao Xu, Yuwei Guo, Gordon Wetzstein, Bo Dai, Hongsheng Li, and Ceyuan Yang. Cameractrl: Enabling camera control for text-to-video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02101, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Cameractrl ii: Dynamic scene exploration via camera-controlled video diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10592, 2025

    Hao He, Ceyuan Yang, Shanchuan Lin, Yinghao Xu, Meng Wei, Liangke Gui, Qi Zhao, Gordon Wetzstein, Lu Jiang, and Hongsheng Li. Cameractrl ii: Dynamic scene exploration via camera-controlled video diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10592, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Video dif- fusion models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022

    Jonathan Ho, Tim Salimans, Alexey Gritsenko, William Chan, Mohammad Norouzi, and David J Fleet. Video dif- fusion models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:8633–8646, 2022. 3

    2022

  7. [15]

    Training-free camera control for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10126, 2024

    Chen Hou, Guoqiang Wei, Yan Zeng, and Zhibo Chen. Training-free camera control for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10126, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Mo- tionmaster: Training-free camera motion transfer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.15789, 2024

    Teng Hu, Jiangning Zhang, Ran Yi, Yating Wang, Hongrui Huang, Jieyu Weng, Yabiao Wang, and Lizhuang Ma. Mo- tionmaster: Training-free camera motion transfer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.15789, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models

    Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, et al. Vbench: Comprehensive bench- mark suite for video generative models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pa...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03603, 2024

    Weijie Kong, Qi Tian, Zijian Zhang, Rox Min, Zuozhuo Dai, Jin Zhou, Jiangfeng Xiong, Xin Li, Bo Wu, Jianwei Zhang, et al. Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03603, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Collab- orative video diffusion: Consistent multi-video generation with camera control.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:16240–16271, 2024

    Zhengfei Kuang, Shengqu Cai, Hao He, Yinghao Xu, Hong- sheng Li, Leonidas J Guibas, and Gordon Wetzstein. Collab- orative video diffusion: Consistent multi-video generation with camera control.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:16240–16271, 2024. 3

    2024

  12. [20]

    Realcam-i2v: Real-world image-to- video generation with interactive complex camera control

    Teng Li, Guangcong Zheng, Rui Jiang, Tao Wu, Yehao Lu, Yining Lin, Xi Li, et al. Realcam-i2v: Real-world image-to- video generation with interactive complex camera control. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.10059, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Wonderland: Navi- gating 3d scenes from a single image

    Hanwen Liang, Junli Cao, Vidit Goel, Guocheng Qian, Sergei Korolev, Demetri Terzopoulos, Konstantinos N Pla- taniotis, Sergey Tulyakov, and Jian Ren. Wonderland: Navi- gating 3d scenes from a single image. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference...

    2025

  14. [22]

    Motionclone: Training-free motion cloning for controllable video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.05338, 2024

    Pengyang Ling, Jiazi Bu, Pan Zhang, Xiaoyi Dong, Yuhang Zang, Tong Wu, Huaian Chen, Jiaqi Wang, and Yi Jin. Motionclone: Training-free motion cloning for controllable video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.05338, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Flow matching for generative mod- eling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky TQ Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximil- ian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative mod- eling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Tra- jectorycrafter: Redirecting camera trajectory for monoc- ular videos via diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.05638, 2, 2025

    YU Mark, Wenbo Hu, Jinbo Xing, and Ying Shan. Tra- jectorycrafter: Redirecting camera trajectory for monoc- ular videos via diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.05638, 2, 2025. 2, 3, 6

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Multidiff: Consistent novel view synthesis from a single image

    Norman M ¨uller, Katja Schwarz, Barbara R ¨ossle, Lorenzo Porzi, Samuel Rota Bul `o, Matthias Nießner, and Peter Kontschieder. Multidiff: Consistent novel view synthesis from a single image. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,...

    2024

  18. [26]

    Openvid-1m: A large-scale high-quality dataset for text-to- video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02371, 2024

    Kepan Nan, Rui Xie, Penghao Zhou, Tiehan Fan, Zhen- heng Yang, Zhijie Chen, Xiang Li, Jian Yang, and Ying Tai. Openvid-1m: A large-scale high-quality dataset for text-to- video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02371, 2024. 5

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF inter- national conference on computer vision, pages 4195–4205,

  20. [28]

    Camctrl3d: Single-image scene exploration with precise 3d camera con- trol.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06006, 2025

    Stefan Popov, Amit Raj, Michael Krainin, Yuanzhen Li, William T Freeman, and Michael Rubinstein. Camctrl3d: Single-image scene exploration with precise 3d camera con- trol.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06006, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Gen3c: 3d-informed world-consistent video generation with precise camera con- trol

    Xuanchi Ren, Tianchang Shen, Jiahui Huang, Huan Ling, Yifan Lu, Merlin Nimier-David, Thomas M ¨uller, Alexan- der Keller, Sanja Fidler, and Jun Gao. Gen3c: 3d-informed world-consistent video generation with precise camera con- trol. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pat...

    2025

  22. [30]

    Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792,

    Uriel Singer, Adam Polyak, Thomas Hayes, Xi Yin, Jie An, Songyang Zhang, Qiyuan Hu, Harry Yang, Oron Ashual, Oran Gafni, et al. Make-a-video: Text-to-video generation without text-video data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14792,

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    Generative camera dolly: Ex- treme monocular dynamic novel view synthesis

    Basile Van Hoorick, Rundi Wu, Ege Ozguroglu, Kyle Sar- gent, Ruoshi Liu, Pavel Tokmakov, Achal Dave, Changxi Zheng, and Carl V ondrick. Generative camera dolly: Ex- treme monocular dynamic novel view synthesis. InEu- ropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 313–331. Springe...

    2024

  24. [32]

    Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video gen- erative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20314, 2025

    Team Wan, Ang Wang, Baole Ai, Bin Wen, Chaojie Mao, Chen-Wei Xie, Di Chen, Feiwu Yu, Haiming Zhao, Jianxiao Yang, et al. Wan: Open and advanced large-scale video gen- erative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20314, 2025. 2, 3

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Cpa: Camera-pose-awareness dif- fusion transformer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01429, 2024

    Yuelei Wang, Jian Zhang, Pengtao Jiang, Hao Zhang, Jin- wei Chen, and Bo Li. Cpa: Camera-pose-awareness dif- fusion transformer for video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01429, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Motionctrl: A unified and flexible motion controller for video generation

    Zhouxia Wang, Ziyang Yuan, Xintao Wang, Yaowei Li, Tianshui Chen, Menghan Xia, Ping Luo, and Ying Shan. Motionctrl: A unified and flexible motion controller for video generation. InACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Pa- pers, pages 1–11, 2024. 3

    2024

  27. [35]

    Trajectory atten- tion for fine-grained video motion control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19324, 2024

    Zeqi Xiao, Wenqi Ouyang, Yifan Zhou, Shuai Yang, Lei Yang, Jianlou Si, and Xingang Pan. Trajectory atten- tion for fine-grained video motion control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19324, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Video diffusion models are training-free motion interpreter and controller.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14864, 2024

    Zeqi Xiao, Yifan Zhou, Shuai Yang, and Xingang Pan. Video diffusion models are training-free motion interpreter and controller.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14864, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Camco: Camera- controllable 3d-consistent image-to-video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02509, 2024

    Dejia Xu, Weili Nie, Chao Liu, Sifei Liu, Jan Kautz, Zhangyang Wang, and Arash Vahdat. Camco: Camera- controllable 3d-consistent image-to-video generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02509, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06072, 2024

    Zhuoyi Yang, Jiayan Teng, Wendi Zheng, Ming Ding, Shiyu Huang, Jiazheng Xu, Yuanming Yang, Wenyi Hong, Xiao- han Zhang, Guanyu Feng, et al. Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06072, 2024. 2, 3

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Dynamic view synthe- sis as an inverse problem.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08004,

    Hidir Yesiltepe and Pinar Yanardag. Dynamic view synthe- sis as an inverse problem.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08004,

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Viewcrafter: Taming video diffusion models for high-fidelity novel view synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02048, 2024

    Wangbo Yu, Jinbo Xing, Li Yuan, Wenbo Hu, Xiaoyu Li, Zhipeng Huang, Xiangjun Gao, Tien-Tsin Wong, Ying Shan, and Yonghong Tian. Viewcrafter: Taming video diffusion models for high-fidelity novel view synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02048, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Stargen: A spatiotemporal autoregression framework with video diffusion model for scalable and con- trollable scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.05763,

    Shangjin Zhai, Zhichao Ye, Jialin Liu, Weijian Xie, Jiaqi Hu, Zhen Peng, Hua Xue, Danpeng Chen, Xiaomeng Wang, Lei Yang, et al. Stargen: A spatiotemporal autoregression framework with video diffusion model for scalable and con- trollable scene generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2...

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Recapture: Gener- ative video camera controls for user-provided videos using masked video fine-tuning

    David Junhao Zhang, Roni Paiss, Shiran Zada, Nikhil Kar- nad, David E Jacobs, Yael Pritch, Inbar Mosseri, Mike Zheng Shou, Neal Wadhwa, and Nataniel Ruiz. Recapture: Gener- ative video camera controls for user-provided videos using masked video fine-tuning. InProceedings of th...

  35. [43]

    Cami2v: Camera-controlled image-to-video dif- fusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15957, 2024

    Guangcong Zheng, Teng Li, Rui Jiang, Yehao Lu, Tao Wu, and Xi Li. Cami2v: Camera-controlled image-to-video dif- fusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15957, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20404, 2024

    Zangwei Zheng, Xiangyu Peng, Tianji Yang, Chenhui Shen, Shenggui Li, Hongxin Liu, Yukun Zhou, Tianyi Li, and Yang You. Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20404, 2024. 2, 3

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.