As far as I am new in the domain of computer animation (I am in the bibliographic research phase for my PhD) it's not still clear for me the difference between a biomechanical model and a computer animation. As I can understand it the animation is the visualisation of the model, biomechanical or no where the program is based. Correct me if I got it wrong or add your knowledge to my perspective if possible please;
Thank you,
Konstantinos.
Hi Konstantinos,
Animation is a process of visualization on computer of any MODEL (2D or 3D) in such a way that it looks alive. The process includes at least three components: 1)Creation of model (2D or 3D) as an object for animation; 2) Development of an algorithm to simulate the model motion; 3) Development of algorithm and framework for the animated model rendering.
You see that "model" has at least 2 meanings here: model as an object for animation, and model as a tool for simulation. It looks like your biomechanical model is a tool for simulation.
Based on the domain where they are used, bio-mechanical animations and computer animations either both solve the same purpose or completely opposite purpose.
In the field of visualization (such as movies, videos etc.) - bio-mechanical props and computer animations both solve the same purpose differing only in implementation speed and cost. Based on the production design and cost feasibility one or the other is selected for each shot. Most of the times successful visualizations (such as Jurrasic Park dinosaurs) use both together (bio-mechanical animators in close range shots and CG anim for long shots).
On the otherhand you may want to differentiate between simulating and modelling:
Computer animation (as in relation to simulation), as a subject and industry practice, is more centered around "mimicing" an "observable" behavior rather than validating it. The goal is to convience the user that they are seeing an actual entity (that it is supposed to mimic). And to achieve that goal it employes all possible techniques (including cheating the human perceptions).
- In other words, computer animation is pointless if there are no observers.
Modelling on the other hand (Bio-Mechanical or not), aims at validating the facts that they were not programmed for. They rely on some ground facts and tries to mimic the original entities in as much their originality as possible without having a perception angle (or viewer).
The diferences from literature / theoritical standpoint (if you want to draw boundaries around these subjects) in the present day implementations:
- It is not the goal of computer animation to derive new 'facts' hitherto unknown or unprogrammed for inside it.
- Modelling, at least as a major practice, is primarily aimed at 'deriving' new insights that were not explicitly programmed inside.
- Any succesful implementation of present day computer animation requires (and even implicitly assumes) the presence of viewer
- All successful techniques of Modelling, explicitly try to eliminate as much pov (point of view) bias as possible.
Finally, as @Elena Martinova pointed out: it is possible in present day to see a merge / combination of these two: For example, a computer animated object to have a back-end model behind it. Often referred to "physically based modelling" of computer animation.
http://gk.palem.in/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction