Stanford bunny
3D test model
The Stanford bunny is a computer graphics 3D test model developed by Greg Turk and Marc Levoy in 1994 at Stanford University. The model consists of 69,451 triangles, with the data determined by 3D scanning a ceramic figurine of a rabbit. This figurine and others were scanned to test methods of range scanning physical objects.
The data can be used to test various graphics algorithms, including polygonal simplification, compression, and surface smoothing. There are a few complications with this dataset that can occur in any 3D scan data: the model is manifold connected and has holes in the data, some due to scanning limits and some due to the object being hollow. These complications provide a more realistic input for any algorithm that is benchmarked with the Stanford bunny, though by today's standards, in terms of geometric complexity and triangle count, it is considered a simple model.
The model was originally available in .ply (polygons) file format in four different resolutions.
The model can be found at https://graphics.stanford.edu/data/3Dscanrep/
See also
3D modeling
Stanford dragon
Utah teapot
Suzanne (3D model)
Cornell box
List of common 3D test models
References
External links
The Stanford 3D Scanning Repository provides the Stanford bunny model for download.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Stanford bunny” is 3D test model. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Stanford, bunny and test, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “3D test model” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q838374. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1994.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Stanford bunny”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Stanford bunny primary sources, Stanford bunny archive and Stanford research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Stanford bunny”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Stanford bunny” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.