Advertisement

Creating Day and Night: Past, Present, and Future

  • Mary K. Kaiser
Conference paper

Abstract

The capability to produce compelling renderings of daylight and nocturnal environments has been a challenge both for flight simulation and for film and related entertainment venues. In this chapter, I compare and contrast the technologies and techniques that these communities have employed during the last half-century. In particular, I will examine the varying criteria (aesthetics-based, performance-based, information-based) employed to evaluate the “goodness” of the rendering. I will also discuss the future challenges awaiting the simulation community, as humans migrate to space environments whose lighting characteristics are decidedly non-terrestrial, and where the transition between “day” and “night” occurs, not at dusk, but at the edge of a boulder or crevasse.

Keywords

Motion Platform Motion Parallax Flight Simulation Park Manager Federal Aviation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. CAT, The Journal for Civil Aviation Training (2007) Annual training sourcebook, Issue 4. Halldale Media GroupGoogle Scholar
  2. Federal Aviation Administration (1991) Airplane simulator qualification advisory circular 120-40BGoogle Scholar
  3. Federal Aviation Administration (1995) Airplane simulator qualification advisory circular 120-40C (Draft)Google Scholar
  4. Kilgore JI (1989) The planes that never leave the ground. Am Herit Invent Technol 4(3):56-63Google Scholar
  5. Maida JC, Bowen CK, Pace JW (2006). Enhancing lighting techniques and augmented reality to improve human task performance. NASA Technical Report NASA/TP-2006-213724; S-981. Johnson Space Center, July, pp 34Google Scholar
  6. Maida JC, Bowen CK, Pace JW (2007) Improving robotic operator performance using augmented reality. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 51st annual meeting, pp 1635-1639Google Scholar
  7. Sweet BT (2006) Visual cueing for vehicular control. Presented at the AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference (Panel Session: MSTC Motion Working Group), Keystone, CO, August 22Google Scholar
  8. Sweet BT, Kaiser MK (2006) Integration of size and binocular disparity visual cues in manual depth-control tasks. AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference, Keystone, CO, 21-24, August. AIAA Technical Papers (AIAA 2006-6628), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Watson AB, Ahumada AJ Jr (2004) The spatial standard observer [abstract]. J Vis 4(8):51, 51aGoogle Scholar
  10. Wentzel KC (1995) An informative guide to qualification of flight simulators for commercial aircraft. AIAA flight simulation technologies conference, Baltimore, MD, 7-10 August. AIAA Technical Papers (A95-39235 10-01)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Factors Research & Technology DivisionNASA Ames Research CenterCaliforniaUSA

Personalised recommendations