Slashdot Mirror


UCLA Adds Physics to Prat-falls

BaltoAaron writes "CNN.com is reporting on Petros Faloutsos , a UCLA scientist, that has developed a program that creates animation based almost solely on physics. Faloutsos "believes his animation program will one day allow virtual stunt artists to replace their flesh-and-blood counterparts in performing otherwise deadly feats of derring-do." "It's the Holy Grail of character animation. Everybody wants to do it, but there's not a whole lot of it out there right now.""

7 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. stick to plots rather than eye candy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    so, better special effects, big whoop

  2. Porn by prizzznecious · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What this guy meant to say is that this is the Holy Grail for Porn. You know why.

    --

    visit the hwky website for a lyrical genius infusion.
  3. Curious by jweb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Haven't special effects wizards been using physics simulators for movie effects and video games for at least a few years now? Sure, this may be more advanced then previous physics engines, but is it really something revolutionary?

    --

    Think For Yourself. Question Authority.
  4. finaly by darklink · · Score: 2, Insightful

    well if they can get the power to do it so be it.

    Every computer generted graphic movie thus far has failed but no one is totaly sure why. Final fantasy though excelent with the eye popping candy you realize that is is just a computer after 5 mins of enteraction. I dont see this comming to true fruition as of yet. But yes it would make for alot better FX. Some times i just watch a movie for the FX.

    The thing that worrys me most is that from most films eye candy takes up for true plot. Now if we can make a computer that can make really good plots the movies will rock.

    But this does sound alot better then bill hicks idea of using the termanaly ill and people sentanced to death to do this work. Though it still is kinda appealing.

    Kudos to any one that can pull it off am sure they will who knows one day we can all make gore fest as a plug in to adobe premere.

  5. Re:I thought this had been done already by Chiasmus_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, there are definite advantages to putting sensors on someone's body.

    If I fall down the stairs, what's going to happen to, say, my right arm, wrist, and hand? Sure, if I'm unconscious, that will all be dictated by physics - I'll flop around like a rag doll and you can nicely see all the reactive forces at work.

    But if I'm conscious, how is the programming going to emulate my increasingly desperate attempts to keep from breaking my neck?

    It seems to me that a better effect would be captured simply by hooking up motion sensors to a stuntman, telling him to take a five-minute break, and then throwing him down the stairs when he wasn't looking. The "mechanics" realm of physics has relatively simple rules; panic does not. So far, we don't have any formulas for the interaction of perceived danger, temperament, adrenaline, and what have you.

    --
    "Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
  6. Human brain still necessary. by TekkonKinkreet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm willing to believe that this is a new and sophisticated tool, though I see there are already a bunch of credible posts about prior art (I go to SIGGRAPH, too).

    My issue is that a lot more than physics needs to go into an animation. There's brain up there controlling all those muscles, it's not just a bunch of sticks and rubber bands. A character animator is an *actor*, part of his or her job is to give the appearance of intention to a character's performance.

    Falling down the stairs is (relatively) easy. Show me the panic the moment he realizes he's lost his balance and can't stop himself. Does he flop like a drunk or roll out like Jet Li?

    You still need to control a character with a human brain, whether that brain belongs to a mocapped stunt man or an animator.

  7. Be sure you know what you're asking for... by yardgnome · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you absolutely sure you want a fighting game that's realistic? Millions of people would complain about "play balance" in a realistic game. Face it, if you hit someone, physics dictates they're going down unless they take drastic measures to counteract that. And like you insinuated, if they take drastic measures, it leaves them open for more punishment. That's why, in real fights, it's almost always the guy who connects first that wins. And medical-grade damage modeling is definitely something you don't want. In almost every fighting game ever made, hitting someone in the stomach staggers them back, but that's about it. From (unfortunate) experience, getting hit in the stomach actuallymakes one double over and takes you out of the running for a minute or more.

    Let's face it...reality isn't fun. It takes a lot of money put from a special effects budget to make a movie look exciting. And that's because in real-life, things just aren't that cool.

    --
    4-star general in a one-man army.