Evaluate 3DGS when reproducing captured appearance is the main task. Mesh and related assets may better suit editable surfaces, controlled materials, collisions and specific interactions. Hybrid delivery is possible. File size and performance depend on assets, formats, renderer and device, not the label alone.
Start with viewing and interaction tasks
A hospitality tour, material configurator and navigable design proposal ask different things of an asset. A single representation need not do everything.
A visual splat does not automatically provide a collision mesh, watertight surface or editable material. Conversely, a geometrically sound mesh does not automatically reproduce the captured appearance.
Compare performance under the same task
Record transferred bytes, time to useful interaction, memory pressure, navigation stability and quality at target viewpoints. Separate cold and cached loading, and record network and display conditions.
Smaller files do not guarantee faster interaction because decoding and rendering differ. A smooth desktop demo is not evidence for every phone.
Separate appearance from interaction data
A splat can present captured appearance while simplified geometry handles navigation limits or interaction. A hybrid still needs coordinate alignment, occlusion, picking and loading checks.
Validate the real task: can a visitor understand the route, find important details and complete exploration on the intended device? Measurement or manufacturing needs separately verified geometry requirements.
Sources and scope
Research synthesis and a proposed diagnostic workflow. Not an unprovided Visuloma case study or benchmark.
Sources checked on 16 October 2026. Capture conditions, methods and versions affect applicability.