We present a compact pipeline for high-fidelity hair reconstruction from multi-view images. While recent 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) methods achieve realistic results, they often require millions of primitives, leading to high storage and rendering costs. Observing that hair exhibits structural and visual similarities across a hairstyle, we cluster strands into representative hair cards and group these into shared texture codebooks. Our approach integrates this structure with 3DGS rendering, significantly reducing reconstruction time and storage while maintaining comparable visual quality. In addition, we propose a generative prior accelerated method to reconstruct the initial strand geometry from a set of images. Our experiments demonstrate a 4-fold reduction in strand reconstruction time and achieve comparable rendering performance with over 200x lower memory footprint.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Full pipeline. Given monocular video frames, we first reconstruct hair strands with our efficient strand generator. The strands are grouped by hair cards, which are further clustered into card groups. Each card group is assigned to a shared Gaussian Texture for compact appearance modeling, a specialized global MLP is used to compute Spherical Harmonics (SH) from the Gaussian Textures.
Figure 3: Strand Generation Pipeline. We use the parametric hair geometric model (PERM) to synthesize a hair texture and decode it into strands. We then attach cylindrical Gaussian primitives to the strands and optimize them from images using the 3DGS.
Figure 5: We model each hair card cluster with a shared Gaussian appearance texture and a lightweight globally-shared decoder, achieving over 270-fold compression.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison of reconstructed hair strands with GaussianHaircut and GaussianHair. Our method achieves higher geometric fidelity, over 4× speedup (vs. GaussianHaircut [ 78 ] ), and a fully automatic pipeline (unlike GaussianHair [ 36 ] ).
Figure 7: Novel-view rendering comparisons on three challenging real-world hairstyles against GaussianHair [ 36 ] and GaussianHaircut [ 78 ] . CGHair achieves comparable quality with 200x fewer parameters. Refer to the supplementary material for quantitative results.
Figure 8: We integrate our CGHair module with GaussianHair [ 36 ] (Ours-GH), and achieve superior hair details.
Figure 9: Strand generator ablations, showing reconstructed hair geometries. Refer to the supplementary material for more results.
Metric
Ours
Only DPCA
Freeze α,β
Only Dstyle
Only Dguide
Pos. Error ↓
0.148
0.162
0.159
0.182
0.170
Cur. Error ↓
6.73
9.12
6.98
7.48
7.19
Table 1: Quantitative ablation studies on strand generation.
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size (MB) ↓
Ratio ↑
Unique
33.99
0.982
0.019
163.7
1.0
W/o card clustering
28.00
0.938
0.042
22.42
7.30
Single-SH
30.48
0.958
0.037
0.46
355.9
Multi-SH
33.50
0.978
0.021
11.95
13.70
Latents(full)
32.40
0.970
0.026
0.71
230.6
Table 2: Quantitative ablation on key modules of CGHair.
K
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size (MB) ↓
Ratio ↑
10
32.40
0.970
0.026
0.71
230.6
30
32.40
0.970
0.026
1.72
95.17
60
32.36
0.969
0.026
3.22
50.84
90
32.10
0.968
0.026
4.72
34.68
Table 3: Codebook size K ablations.
D
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size (MB) ↓
Ratio ↑
32
32.39
0.969
0.026
0.60
272.8
64
32.40
0.970
0.026
0.71
230.6
128
32.18
0.969
0.026
0.93
176.0
256
31.94
0.967
0.027
1.37
119.5
Table 4: Latent strand feature dimensionality D ablations.
NT
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
Size (MB) ↓
Ratio ↑
16
31.49
0.964
0.030
0.60
272.8
32
31.84
0.967
0.027
0.64
255.8
64
32.40
0.970
0.026
0.71
230.6
96
32.57
0.971
0.025
0.79
207.2
400
33.04
0.975
0.022
1.53
108.0
Table 5: Quantitative ablations on texture clusters number NT .
Figure 10: We show the ablations of our strand generator on several real captured hair styles.
Model
Recon. Time
Ratio
GaussianHairCut
11h
4.14
GaussianHair
8h
3.01
Ours
2h40m
1.00
Table 6: Comparison of the strand reconstruction time .
Model
Recon. Time
Ratio
GaussianHairCut
15h
3.00
GaussianHair
10.5h
2.10
Ours
5h
1.00
Table 7: Comparison on Time for End-to-End Reconstruction .
Appearance Features
File size
Model
Size (Mb)
Ratio
Size (Mb)
Ratio
GaussianHairCut
544
464
93
77.51
GaussianHair
505
431
90
75
Ours
1.17
1.00
1.20
1.00
Table 8: Comparison of storage cost .
Curly
Short
Long
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
GaussianHairCut
30.07
0.9225
0.0565
31.03
0.9041
0.0774
27.78
0.8719
0.1010
GaussianHair
31.56
0.9290
0.0466
32.07
0.9020
0.0597
29.12
0.8791
0.0749
Ours
30.34
0.9153
0.0528
31.15
0.8928
0.0696
28.60
0.8696
0.0815
Table 9: Quantitative comparison on appearance . Across three hair types (Curly, Short, and Long) from GaussianHair dataset.
Figure 11: Qualitative ablation results using a carefully designed synthetic hairstyle, illustrating the algorithm’s robustness in complex scenarios where hair exhibits multiple color tones.
Figure 12: More hairstyles from the MonoHair dataset. We compare our reconstructed strands against MonoHair and GaussianHaircut.
Figure 13: More Hairstyles appearance rendering comparisons. We compare our appearance rendering results against GaussianHaircut on 3 hairstyles from the MonoHair dataset and one from the H3DS dataset.
Figure 14: We also compare our reconstructed strands with GaussianHaircut on the H3DS hairstyle; note that GaussianHaircut failed.
Figure 15: Animated hair: On the left, original reconstruction, on the right, random timestamp frame from a strand-based animation.
Figure 16: Our explicit strand representation naturally enables strand-based dynamic simulation for a synthetic hairstyle (top), a real captured hairstyle from GaussianHair dataset (middle), and the other one from MonoHair Dataset (bottom). The simulated Gaussian strands are rendered using the standard Gaussian rendering pipeline. Please refer to the project webpage for a better visualization of the dynamic motions.
Figure 17: We show several example representative strand textures for grouped strands, which are represented by a hair card. The results are reconstructed from the hairstyle big wavy from the Monohair dataset.
Figure 18: Visualization of our additional free-view renderings of real-captured hairstyles.
We present an automated pipeline that converts hair-card models into high-quality strand-based hairstyles. Given a collection of textured triangular or quad strips as input, our method produces a strand-based representation that preserves the original hairstyle while enriching it with fine-scale geometric detail and adhering to standard production requirements: strands originate from the scalp, roots are uniformly distributed, and the hair volume is plausibly filled. The resulting assets are directly compatible with strand-based rendering, physics-based simulation, and common grooming modifiers (e.g., clumping, curling, noise) for enhanced realism and artistic control. We validate our approach on a large and diverse set of hairstyles, including short and long hair, curly styles, and complex styles such as buns and ponytails.
Facial hair is a defining trait of personal identity, yet remains a critical bottleneck for digital avatars. Recent volumetric methods achieve photorealism but bake hair into the underlying face geometry, preventing editability and failing to resolve sparse, strand-like structures. Meanwhile, scalp-hair reconstruction methods target dense hair volumes and do not transfer to the sparse, spatially-varying nature of facial hair. We present a pipeline that automatically reconstructs facial hair -- beard, mustache, lashes, and brows -- from multi-view images, converting an unstructured 3D Gaussian representation into an explicit curve-based strand representation. We resolve geometric ambiguities in four stages: (i) optimizing 3D Gaussians constrained by tracked head geometry to enforce early ray termination and suppress sub-surface noise; (ii) tracing continuous strands robust to frequent crossings and extreme curvature; (iii) grounding strands to the surface and resolving root-tip ambiguity via a physically-motivated prior; and (iv) refining the reconstruction through opacity-driven density control under photometric optimization. To our knowledge, this is the first method to reconstruct high-fidelity facial hair strands from a 3D Gaussian representation. The recovered strands faithfully preserve the orientation and sparsity patterns characteristic of facial hair, and yield assets immediately suitable for downstream production tasks, including facial animation and physical simulation, geometric grooming and transfer, appearance editing, and physics-based rendering.
We propose a lightweight real-time method for reconstructing strand-based hair G-Buffers from severely undersampled rasterized inputs. Our pipeline first applies neural spatial reconstruction and temporal accumulation to recover hair coverage, i.e., fractional hair visibility within a pixel, and tangent. It then uses a tangent-guided reconstruction step to complete the position, which is subsequently used for physically based deferred hair shading. We evaluate our method across a diverse set of hairstyles, including straight, wavy, afro, and ponytail styles, under both static and dynamic scenarios. Our method achieves higher hair reconstruction quality than general industrial neural reconstruction solutions such as DLSS and FSR.
Chenghao Wu, Yuefan Shen, Tao Huang +3
University of Manchester, United Kingdom · LIGHTSPEED, China · LIGHTSPEED, USA