Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Animation Example - New to the industry


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Date: Mar 9 12:54 PM, 2010
Animation Example - New to the industry


Hello All,

I am new to the accident reconstruction industry, but have been producing animations for over 12 years. We made a demo video that can be seen here:


I would gladly welcome any feedback regarding things to improve.

Thank you in advance!

- Jonathan Arnold





__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 85
Date: Mar 9 11:18 PM, 2010

Well, for one the sounds are completely superfluous.  I realize you're going after a realistic effect,  but I'm going after a functional, relevant effect.  To consider the realistic effect more aptly, consider that people are frequently screaming and crying during collisions.  Why not include those?  Because they serve no function; nor do the sound of the crash, or tires squealing - for court purposes anyway.  If you're looking to get into doing CGI for entertainment, then you're where you need to be.  If you want to present your animations in court cases (which is where ultimately all of this stuff we talk about on here gets presented), then you need to focus on functionality, relevance, precision and accuracy.

Now, it sure does look pretty, but in order for this to be useful or relevant, you'll have to determine someway to show that your animations are accurate representations of a given collision.  In other words, it can't just look pretty, or just be a good representation of what might have happened:  the software will have to show that it's capable of accurately and precisely modeling real collisions against which we can compare the two.  Say, lots of videography on many actual collisions (which you don't get to see) is taken, and then you're tasked to animate the collision based off of the raw data and laws of motion.  Now, if the product you return accurately and precisely recreates what we see in the video of those several collisions, I think you'd be a long way towards the software being useful in litigation.

The only other major component you'd have to worry yourself after is that either you, or people who use the software will have to demonstrate independent understanding of the relevant mathematics and physics which the animation has to take account of to draw the crash:  projection of vectors, projective geometry, tensor analysis and so on.

But, I think the animation graphics-wise is quite good.  I think that the model, if an accurate representation of what a collision actually looked like, could be quite a good asset. 

What is it that you plan on doing with this? I suppose that will determine what I think of it because it would be context specific.


__________________
Regards,
Johnathan

"Ending a sentence with a preposition is a situation up with which I shall not put."  - Sir Winston Churchill
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard