Monday, February 21, 2011

Readings: Spalter & Wesley---Topic: Animation & Virtual Reality

Summary:

Chapters 9 and 10 in Spalter & Wesley’s The Computer in the Visual Arts, covers the topics of virtual reality and animation. For the most part, the chapter on virtual reality is not completely new to me. However, the depth to which the authors explained a CAVE room is informative. The chapter on animation reveals many functions I was unfamiliar with. They include key frames, inbetweening, linear interpolation, non-linear interpolation, and forward/inverse kinematics.

Spalter & Wesley touch on many of the input limitations of virtual reality. A large portion of the problems exists with the tools used to work within the virtual environment (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). The design of tools such as a 3D mouse, sensor-filled gloves, force feedback devices, and tracking systems are not ergonomically comfortable for extended use (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). In some cases, like that of the force feedback devices, improer tool use may lead to user injury (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Limitations of the sensor filled glove is its inability to recognize hand tracking and finger positioning well enough for more complex designs (Spalter & Wesley, 1999).

Some output devices for presenting a virtual environment are more successful than others. The Ivan Sutherland head mounted display and the binocular monitors are very bulky. They are used for single users (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). However, a “CAVE automatic virtual environment” is for multiple users (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Users wear stereo glasses to interact with the environment (Spalter & Wesley, 1999).

Animation terms such key frames, inbetweening, linear interpolation, non-linear interpolation, and forward/inverse kinematics are various ways in which 2D and 3D animations are approached. Key frames are layered images used create a smooth transitional animation (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). This works best for less complex animations because the process is time consuming (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Also, for less complex animations, use inbetweening (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). If used on a highly detailed animation, the result may appear very mechanical (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). The difference between linear and non linear interpolation is that the object position for linear is located in a straight line, while in a curvre for non linear (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Forward kinematics is a tool used to designate the start position and direct of the movement of an object (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Inverse kinematics uses constraints to identify the motion and final position (Spalter & Wesley, 1999).

Contextualize:

Both virtual reality and animation are beneficial to Interior Architecture. The virtual output devices help to convey not only a designers idea, but also leads them to discover a user’s interaction in a specific setting or with a specific object. Environments created with the CAVE output tool allow users to walk thorough an interior space. Through this application, designers are able to identify obstacles and effective wayfinding tools.

Animation used for Interior Architecture may consist of demonstrating walkthroughs of a space to clients, while not only referencing the interior elements, but also animating visible outside activities occurring within the scenes. Additionally, animations are successful in illustrating the mechanics of interior products.

Argument:

Some of the technical tools designers chose for representing interior products will be more successful than with others. Inverse kinematics and morphing allow for a greater understanding on the mechanics of interior products. However, inverse kinematics is a truer representation. This is ideal for chairs that fold and tables that extend or flip down. Most of all, for products like these and for ones that have 2 in 1 functions, such as a chair that becomes a table, or a sofa that becomes a bed, the use of kinematics and morphing provides a visual presentation of a designer’s intent for function and operation. Motion capture would help to address the user within the animation. However, designers still would not know the true interactions users would experience. The possibility of integrating the object animation with tactile properties the user can feel would be something for future exploration not only with animation, but also with virtual reality.

Evidence:

The tools used for animation and virtual reality environments have their limitations. As stated before inbetweening works best with less complicated animations (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). In addition, morphing shows only a true representation of the desired initial image and final image (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). The technique fills in all of the other stages (Spalter & Wesley, 1999). Therefore, designers must determine the appropriate tools to use for successfully demonstrating their products in a 3D environment.


References:

Spalter, A., & Wesley, A. (1999). In The Computer in The Visual Arts (pp. 298-365). Longman Inc.

No comments:

Post a Comment