The pelicans are one-shot with not tools: Think a bunch, write a bunch of SVG, done.

The pretty 3d stuff you see are agents controlling a Blender MCP in a loop where they look at the scene, think, adjust the scene, repeat.

▲

simonw 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah, that's a good point. My basic pelican test doesn't allow the model to render their work and iterate on it. The 3D models all come from agent systems that are rendering with Blender or screenshotting with Playwright along the way.

▲

agar 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Have you looked at assbench.com? Even with threeJS rendering, screenshotting with Playwright, and iteration (check the prompt) some of the models are shockingly bad. I wonder whether the rendering quality is affected by the requirement for skin physics on click; if so, it raises a valid question about models creating pretty pictures but break when interactivity is required.

(As I said in a separate comment above, results are all bikini-clad and not revealing. However, whether it is NSFW is up to you/your work policies.)

▲

epihelix 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you allow rendering and iteration on the basic pelican test, does it improve the final output?

	▲	simonw 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It didn't last time I tried that, but that was for GPT-5. I need to try again with more recent models.

▲

vineyardmike 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I’d really like to see what each model comes up with if given a basic harness to render and iterate. They’ve all gotten pretty good at basic one shot pelicans, but seeing what they do when given a direct goal, and even getting a time lapse of each image as they edit and adjust would be really fun.

	▲	AspireOne 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Very easy to do. It's a nice silly thing to try, so I'll conduct this very important experiment and update you on the results if I remember to do so