Advertisement

The Visual Computer

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 106–116 | Cite as

A technique for motion specification in computer animation

  • C. W. A. M. van Overveld
Article

Abstract

A technique is discussed for the interactive specification and real-time evaluation of the movements of geometrical objects with several degrees of freedom. The technique is a midway between a faithful simulation of the dynamics and kinematics of the object and completely free user control, and as such it is well suited for animated drawings, for example. The method works in two steps: first, the motion of a relevant subobject (the skeleton) is specified interactively in real time. Next, the entire object is deformed and oriented in space such as to match the form of the skeleton. Depending on the complexity of the object, this second step either takes place in real time, or as a batch process. Several forms of geometrical constraints, as well as stretching and squeezing, are supported.

Key words

Animation Interactive motion specification Approximated dynamical simulation Distance weighted interpolation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barzel R, Barr AH (1988) A modeling system based on dynamic constraints. ACM Comput Graphics (Proc SIGGRAPH) 22:179–188Google Scholar
  2. Boehm W, Farin G, Kahman J (1984) A survey of curve and surface methods in CAGD. Computer Aided Geometric Design 1:1–60Google Scholar
  3. Burtnyk N, Wein M (1976) Interactive skeleton techniques for enhancing motion dynamics in key frame animation. Commun ACM 19:564–569Google Scholar
  4. Hahn JK (1988) Realistic animation of rigid bodies. ACM Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 22:299–308Google Scholar
  5. Moore M, Wilhelms J (1988) Collision detection and response for computer animation. ACM Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 22:289–298Google Scholar
  6. Platt JC, Barr AH (1988) Constraint methods for flexible models. ACM Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 22:279–288Google Scholar
  7. Reeves W (1981) Inbetweening for computer animation using moving point constraints. ACM Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 15:263–269Google Scholar
  8. Reynolds C (1982) Computer animation with scripts and actors. Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 16:289–296Google Scholar
  9. Sneddon IN (ed) (1976) Encyclopaedic dictionary of mathematics for engineers and applied scientists. Glasgow Univ, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 707–709 (and references)Google Scholar
  10. Terzopoulos D, Fleischer K (1988) Modeling inelastic deformation: viscoelasticity, plasticity, fracture. ACM Comput Graph (Proc SIGGRAPH) 22:269–278Google Scholar
  11. Wyvill B (1988) Navigating the animation jungle. Presented at the International Summer Institute: State of the Art in Computer Graphics, Exeter, UK (4–8 July 1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. W. A. M. van Overveld
    • 1
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations