CyberEdge Journal

Let us appreciate Randy Pausch

2007-09-21T12:40:00.000-07:00

I just learned that my friend, Randy Pausch, has pancreatic cancer and is not expected to recover.

Randy caught my attention in 1991 in New Orleans. At the CHI ’91 conference, he was the talk of the town after his presentation, “Virtual Reality on $5 a Day”. Keep in mind that in 1991, a modestly usable VR system cost a cool quarter million, so Randy’s demonstration of building a system on the cheap was mind blowing.

Here is what I wrote in CyberEdge Journal #3, May/June 1991:

The next speaker was Randy Pausch, who excited the audience with his explanation of a home-brew VR-based system which cost only $5.00 per day. Lacking an adequate budget to purchase a VR system, Pausch built his own. He combined two mechanically linked Private Eye displays, a Mattel PowerGlove, and one Polhemus 3Space tracker. The system provides 720 by 280 spatial resolution and displays wire-frame graphics generated by a 80386-based, 2.5 MIP, PC clone system. Including the voice input which he intends to add, Pausch calculates the total system cost at under $5000, which when amortized over the typical three year life of the equipment, equals a cost of about $4.55 per day. He is now soliciting support to build 10-20 such systems, providing access to VR to an entire graduate class.

Here's Randy at CHI '91, demonstrating his home-made HMD.

In my effort to be a calm and cool journalist, this meager mention hardly reflects the excitement Randy stirred in the CHI crowd, and through the fledgling VR industry. While SGI and NASA were struggling to build systems that would fit into one room and cost less than a couple of houses, Randy built a usable system for less than $5,000. It was amazing, and he was the toast of the conference.

This was just a precursor of what Randy’s imagination and energy would enable him to do. He became quite the celebrity from the $5 a day VR system, and was able to leverage that fame to a position where he was able to lead the development of ALICE, an easy-to-use world-building package. He moved from the University of Virginia to Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh, where he established a well-respected lab, and continued to great work.

Drop Randy a line and let him know that he made a difference. I know I’m going to miss him.

You may have heard about Randy's inspiring "Last Lecture." Find it here: Randy Pausch's Last Lecture

To make a donation to help conquer pancreatic cancer, make donations payable to UPCI/Pancreatic Cancer Research/Liver Pancreas Institute. Add a memo to note that your gift is given in Randy Pausch's honor and to support the research of Dr. Herb Zeh. Mail to: Development Dept., UPMC Cancer Pavilion, Suite 1B, 5150 Centre Ave., Pittsburgh PA 15232. You can also contact Kambra McConnel in the Development Dept. for the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute at 412-623-4700.

Dassault Systèmes Acquires Virtools

2005-07-26T09:04:00.000-07:00

Dassault Systèmes Acquires Unique 3D Behavioral Technology with Purchase of Virtools

DS to provide interactive 3D experience platform to give life to 3D

Paris, France, July 26, 2005 - Dassault Systèmes today announced that it has acquired Paris-based Virtools SA, a team of experts in 3D interactive web applications that give live behavior to 3D content, for approximately 12 million euros.

Virtools' applications allow users not familiar with 3D modeling to quickly and easily add life experience to any 3D object. As an example, using the company's technology, users can experience the shopping behavior of a typical consumer in a supermarket or visualize the ergonomics of a driver as he or she drives a car through a city.

Virtools' comprehensive software solutions enable companies to give life to 3D by creating applications with rich game-like 3D interactivity. Virtools has many production customers in industrial design, marketing, 3D web-based CRM applications, and multimedia applications as well as in video game development. Customers include Procter & Gamble, L'Oréal, Microsoft Game Studio, Electronic Arts, PSA Peugeot Citroen, and EADS.

"We chose Virtools several years ago to build our 3D real-time interactive applications, such as spatial mission experiences and the virtual cockpit," said Nicolas Chevassus, Corporate Research Center, EADS. "The combination of Virtools and Dassault Systèmes reinforces our strategic partnership."

With this acquisition, DS is adding to its R&D force a core team of expert pioneers in 3D Interactivity. Virtools brings to DS breakthrough technologies that will accelerate the use of 3D for all types of real-time, interactive consumer applications on the web. As a development platform, Virtools provides next-generation solutions for developing highly realistic 3D experiences with game-like" interactivity, as well as distributing and running 3D applications on the web. These solutions range from browser-based applications to large-scale 3D visualizations.

"The visionary R&D team at Virtools will be an immediate asset to DS as we execute our strategy of democratizing 3D," said Bernard Charlès, president and CEO, Dassault Systèmes. "By combining our assets, we will deliver the next-generation 3D web platform that will enable a wide range of users to imagine, share, and experience in 3D."

"I am delighted that Dassault Systèmes has chosen Virtools as a foundation of its 3D democratization strategy," said Bertrand Duplat, founder and CTO of Virtools. "We share the vision of market convergence with DS for extended use of interactive 3D."

"I look forward to the contribution that Virtools will bring to Dassault Systèmes," said Hervé Yahi, CEO of Virtools. "We will continue to serve our customers and will enhance and improve support worldwide."

Kelly Dove named Editor-in-Chief of Computer Graphics World

2005-07-12T08:52:00.000-07:00

Longtime Editor, Phil LoPiccolo moves to new position

July 11, 2005 Nashua, NH -- PennWell is pleased to announce the selection of Kelly Dove as Editor-in-Chief for Computer Graphics World magazine. The announcement of Dove comes after a two-month search to replace Phil LoPiccolo, who moved to the Chief Editor position at Solid State Technology, another PennWell title.

Ms. Dove brings both publication and client experience to her position at CGW. As Founding Editor and Editor-in-Chief for 3D Design magazine, she was instrumental in the successful launch of this title for CMP. In addition, she developed and managed the corresponding website, the conference and exhibition, creating a unified media brand in the high-tech trade space. Most recently, Dove was the Director of Public Relations for a Boxx Technologies, a workstation manufacturer focused on the entertainment and digital content creation industries.

“I have been a fan of Computer Graphics World for many years,” says Dove. “It is a well-respected title among trade publications as well as the companies they serve. Karen Moltenbrey, Courtney Howard and the excellent team of contributing editors continually put out a top-notch magazine as the recent ASBPE Gold Award proves. I look forward to working with such a dynamic team.”

“We are thrilled to have Kelly join our team,” notes Associate Publisher Randy Jeter. “Her in-depth knowledge of the market, combined with her relationships and previous editorial experience in print and online publishing, will be instrumental as we continue to expand our leadership position.” Senior Technical Editor Karen Moltenbrey concurs. “I have known Kelly for quite some time, both on a personal and professional level, and I look forward to working with her. Her energy and knowledge of the industry certainly will be an asset to our publication. I anticipate exciting things ahead.”

CyberEdge On-line, First VR Website, Redesigned For Ease Of Use.

2005-06-21T21:50:00.000-07:00

CyberEdge Information Services celebrates 10-year anniversary of website by re-launching with new content, navigation, design

The first, and longest continuously published website covering virtual reality (VR) and visual simulation (VizSim) was re-launched today with a new look, new content, and new navigation designed to make finding information faster and easier.

CyberEdge On-line went live in 1995, and since then has served hundreds of thousands of pages to visitors from around the world. The site features articles, links, a glossary of VR terminology, a Health and Safety Section, reviews of VR books, many illustrations, and much more. It provides one of the richest stores of VR and VizSim information on the Web, and all of the content is free of charge.

Said Ben Delaney, President of CyberEdge Information Services, Inc., “We are thrilled to see the newest incarnation of CyberEdge On-Line go live after several months of development. I can't think of a better way to celebrate the 10th anniversary of our website. The new design by CK Kuebel (www.kuebel.com) is outstanding, with easy to use navigation, and a clean, modern look that is attractive and functional. I think our new site will be even more useful to the thousands of visitors we welcome every month.”

CyberEdge On-Line also provides detailed information about CyberEdge Information Services, one of the leading sources of market data and marketing services for VR and VizSim companies. Publishers of the much-cited annual market study, The Market for Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality Systems, CyberEdge Information Services has provided consulting services, presentations, market research, and other communications services to an international who’s-who of VR and VizSim companies. Their clients include EDS, HP, IBM, Kodak, KPMG, LG Electronics, SGI, Siemens, SONY, SUN Microsystems, and many other well-known organizations.

CyberEdge Information Services invites you to visit CyberEdge On-Line at www.cyberedge.com. For more information, visit the website, email to “info at cyberedge.com”, or call 510 419-0800.

Update on Immersion's Touchsense technology

2005-06-02T17:23:00.000-07:00

I just got back form a visit to Immersion to take a look, er, feel, of their new TouchSense system, which I wrote about last week.

Mike Levin, VP Industrial and Gaming, showed me the system. In a word, or two, it works. I was amazed at how the touchscreen buttons felt like real objects when I pushed them. The demo was simple, based on a control panel for an automobile. Each button had a distinctive feel. Some were used to select functions, such as the heater or radio, which opened a second-level screen. The second-level screens replicated controls – volume, channel, temperature, etc. Each of these controls had a slide with detent feel, and they also signaled end of range with a different vibration. The system is slick and obvious, and to me, seems like an excellent application for haptic feedback.

While I was there, Mike also showed me a VibeTonz-equipped cell phone. This system replaces the simple vibration common in cellphones with tunable vibrations that can be attached to ring tones, used in games, or assigned by the user to different numbers, just as one assigns different rings. This system also works well, and seems definitelyy useful. The first Samsung phones with VibeTonz were released in April by Verizon Wireless.

(Disclaimer: I own a bit of Immersion stock and have consulted with them in the past.)

Annual market study seeks participants

2005-06-01T10:37:00.000-07:00

We are about to start the survey for the 7th Edition of our annual report, the Market for Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality systems.

We are actively seeking members of the VizSim/VR community to join our research panel. People who complete the 49-question survey will receive a free copy of the Executive Summary of the report, which we expect to complete in late fall. Participants also receive a discount on their purchase of the full report. Signup closes 15 June.

If you wish to participate sign up here: Join the Research Panel

Touch Me, Feel Me

2005-05-24T11:11:00.000-07:00

Immersion Announces Haptic Feedback for Touchscreens

Imagine that. Immersion has just announced a touchscreen with haptic feedback. My first thought was, how'd they DO that?

(Disclaimer: I own a bit of Immersion stock and have consulted with them in the past.)

I spoke with Mike Levin, Immersion's VP in the Industrial Control Group, and learned how TouchSense works.

Most of us have all used touchscreens at some time. They appear on ATM machines, Lotto kiosks, museum displays, and a lot of other places. They work in a variety of ways, but the bottom line is that you touch the surface of a display system, and that system senses where your finger (elbow? nose?) is and reacts. Many systems provide audible feedback to let you know they have reacted to your touch.

But no touchscreen had any tactile feedback. That is, you could not feel a button depress, or a slider move. Immersion has addressed that problem.

Immersion developed TouchSense® technology that allows touchscreens to "touch back." The system is composed of actuators, controllers, and software.Touchscreen manufacturers, integrators, and product OEMs can now design these components into their touch-enabled systems to easily add tactile feedback.

The TouchSense system is based on vibrotactile feedback. In other words, there is no motor that applies forces to your hand. What there is is a group of devices that vibrate the touchscreen surface up and down, side to side, or both ways. When you push on the image of a button, the touchscreen tells the TouchSense system, and a suitable feedback vibration is created. Because your finger is in a single location, it feels like the button is responding,though in fact the entire screen is moving. Instead of feeling just the hard surface of the screen, graphical buttons can seem to depress and release. This responsive action supplies a more intuitive, natural, multisensory experience.

Levin told me that he thinks this technology will be especiallyy useful in loud and distracting locations, like the cab of a HUMVEE, or a service station in a noisy bar. He also thinks that TouchSense will have medical applications, because gloved doctors need feedback when they press the keys of a virtual keyboard displayed on a washable touchscreen in the operating room.

Immersion claims that clarity and accuracy of the feedback are unaffected for flat touchscreen sizes ranging from 2 to 19 inches, and the technology can be applied to all types of touchscreens including capacitive, resistive (4-, 5-, and 8-wire), surface acoustic wave, and infrared. The TouchSensee system will cost OEMs anywhere from $5 per unit for small screens, up to around $50 per unit for a 19" display.

Here are a few of the key features, from Immersion's press release:

Graphical buttons can provide the familiar up and down forces of physical buttons
Menu items can supply a pulse sensation when lightly touched and a confirming push-back response when pressed
A rocker switch can exhibit increasing or decreasing vibrations corresponding to motor or fan speed, magnitude, or other parameter
Enter, Next, and other major and minor functions can supply a consistent feel throughout an application
Scrolling displays can provide a stop sensation when the first or last items have been reached
Switch controls can exhibit a pop effect
Levers can offer a click response for each possible setting.

Immersion assists manufacturers with product configuration and prototyping, and supports its partners from integration through manufacturing.

Great stuff, I think. Demo systems areavailable now, and developer kits will be out in the next few months. TouchSense will probably be seen first in automotive systems, followed by public displays, assuming that the technology is robust enough. Public uses, such as kiosks and gaming machines are the places where the least informed users are, and those users are the ones who will most benefit from tactile feedback.

Another good application would be for persons with disabilities, especially those with low vision or motor-control disfunctions. For those people, haptic feedback could greatly facilitate computer use. However, Levin tells me that this market is limited, and Immersion would need to find a partner already active there.

I love cool gadgets and I certainly think this qualifies. I haven't had a chance to try it yet, but I look forward to getting my hands on Immersion's Tactile Touchscreen. I'll report when I do.

New website provides guidance on disruptive technologies

2005-05-15T11:41:00.000-07:00

BenDelaney.com offers articles, essays, and presentations

Oakland, Calif. --Because the accelerating rate of technological change will have profound impacts on society, Ben Delaney has launched a new website to address this issue. Delaney has spent the past thirty years observing and shaping technology. He is a leading expert in virtual reality, visual simulation, and other advanced technologies. President of CyberEdge Information Services, Inc., his ability to explain complex concepts in plain language have made him an internationally respected speaker, writer, and advisor.

The website, www.bendelaney.com, designed by the award-winning Ck Kuebel (www.kuebel.com), includes articles, essays, and presentations.

Delaney addresses many aspects of high technology, especially how it is leading to a “Beyond Darwin World”, in which human beings assume control of their own evolution and, through the widespread use of cybernetic prosthetics, attain supra-human powers.

The technologies leading to the “Beyond Darwin World” include nanotechnology (the technology of the very small), medical/bio technology, computing and communications technology, and energy technologies. By the time today’s kindergartners are starting families, these disciplines will have arrived at “tipping points” leading to major changes in nearly every aspect of society.

Delaney explains, “the convergence of these tipping points will lead to a fully virtualized world, in which real and virtual experiences are almost indistinguishable. People will have cyber-telepathic powers, enabling them to communicate simply by thinking of information and where they need to send it. Likewise, they will be able to access vast amounts of information by simply posing a mental question. Communications will be facilitated by wireless, computerized devices, implanted in their bodies.”

Much of this technology is already being developed. “The social issues need to be addressed now”, Delaney says, “to prepare us for the inevitable disruptions they will cause by the mid-21st century.”

Ben Delaney is available to discuss these ideas in public presentations or private briefings. He offers advisory services for senior management that facilitates planning to address the serious impact of advanc

At GDC 05: Get the phone, there’s a game calling!

2005-05-09T11:14:00.000-07:00

10 March, 2005, San Francisco – I was amazed that they could fill a good sized room at Moscone Center at 9:00 AM at the Game Developers Conference. That speaks to the fact that the hottest part of the white-hot game market these days is on mobile platforms, primarily cell phones. After my surprise of the day before – I had seen only one skateboard-toting punk in a full day on the exhibit floor – I should have realized that GDC has grown up a lot since I last attended. Games are no longer kid stuff, and the GDC this year was populated by far more people in suits than people with their tattoos and piercings showing.

It was the serious folks filling the room on Thursday morning to hear about the International Game Developers Association’s (www.idga.org) latest whitepaper, The State of the Mobile Games Industry. Brian Robbins, of Fuel Industries, chairperson of the Online Games SIG, introduced a panel of five for an hour-long session. Moderating the panel was Don Wisnewski, Superscape’s Senior Vice President, Publishing and Marketing, who described the 60-page whitepaper as a labor of love by dedicated people who are eager to see the success of gaming on the PC and console platforms replicated on mobile devices. Considering the work it takes to create this sort of document, he was certainly right. He went on to characterize the greatest problems of mobile game development as stemming from the increasingly rapid development cycle. PC and consoles hardware typically has a 18-24 month lifetime, while mobile phone platforms are going through substantial revisions every 4-12 months. And when every new handset hits the market, the phone companies expect classic and new games to be ready – running, debugged, and ported to dozens of platforms.

You want how many versions?

The multi-platform issue was the challenge most often mentioned by the panelists. Jon Estanislao, Senior Manager, Business Development and Platforms for Activision, made the point that while there were many areas of game development for mobiles that are similar to other platforms, such as planning and design, playability issues, prototyping, development and approvals, there are also significant differences. These include porting to dozens, if not hundreds of platforms, submitting finished games to service providers, and obtaining certifications from those providers. Lou Fasulo, Senior Product Manager, Games and Applications, at Cingular Wireless, concurred, adding that he deals with six or seven new handsets every month, and that at any given moment, Cingular must support over 100 different models. Estanislao said that this impacts developers in several key areas. First, developers must themselves have dozens to hundreds of phones in-house for testing. Phones come in families, which make the chore slightly less burdensome, but each phone may also be localized to dozens of locations, each requiring a different language, unit of currency or measurement, or other customization. Successful developers quickly learn to write clean, modular code to facilitate porting and localization, and to reduce the testing regimen to manageable levels. But no matter how well the code is written, he cautioned, obtaining certification from the carriers (service providers) is still a major hassle, because each has its own expectations and requirements. But what they all want are tight code, with file sizes ranging from 64K to 300K, adherence to naming conventions and menu standards, and accepted techniques for dealing with those annoying voice calls and messages that interrupt the important gaming experience.

Another item that differs from console games development is the billing model. Games for mobiles are sold in a variety of ways, including one-time purchase (most like console games), subscription, pay-per-play, and micro-payments. Each of these payment methods is based, at least partially, on player perceptions. This is an impulse-driven marketplace. There are no store shelves, and potential buyers do not linger over their decisions. So the initial presentation must convey the value of the game quickly, and the payment structure must be consistent with the user’s general impressions of the game. One positive angle is that there is no competitive shopping – if you want a particular game to play on your Nokia N-Gage on the Verizon network, you have only one place to buy it.

Quick reactions are not only a requirement for the players, Fasulo added. Because the pace of phone development is so fast, and the carriers so twitchy in a highly competitive landscape, the game developer must be ready to turn on a dime and give 8 cents change. He felt that key issues, in a addition to those cited by Estanislao, include the ability to quickly port a game to a new handset, the ability to present new concepts well – that means fast and compelling – and the ability to consistently deliver good product on time. However, he, as did every panelist, emphasized over and over that porting is the key, and that the most successful game publishers are the one who can move their titles to new platforms quickly. As he put it, “learn to port, port, port!”

Another issue he emphasized, from what sounded like personal experience, is that the market will not wait. “Late”, he said, “equals dead.” Delivering great product, on time, and running well on dozens of handsets requires a professional and disciplined process. Aside from the rapid turnover of hardware, the software itself tends to have a short lifetime, especially movie tie-ins, which may be dead in months, but must arrive as the picture hits the theaters.

Other issues mentioned regarding development include the expectation of increasing bandwidth in the next six to twelve months. This will allow for larger games, enhanced sales presentations, and improved game play, especially for multi-player titles. Branding is important, all agreed, and Fasulo noted that the top-selling titles are movie tie-ins, sequels to other popular games, and sports games. Solid branding can boost sales, both through publisher name recognition, and through connections to console games and other well-known properties. He advised publishers to put more energy into branding.

The mobile game biz
The two other panelists, Oliver Miao, President of Centerscore, and Greg Ballard, President of Sorrent, addressed the business of game publishing. Miao emphasized the difficulties of building and running a game development business. It sounded like he has been through the wringer, but maybe he just had too much fun the night before. He told us that the publishing business was hard, that most developers struggle to stay cash-flow positive, and that, since not many people actually seem to like porting titles, that may be a good business model. Since getting financing is so hard, one way to succeed, he suggested, is to win a contest. This was just as valuable as it seems here.

Ballard, on the other hand, had some useful information. He said that the carriers see a need for higher quality, that the move to quality began in 2004, and he sees the trend accelerating in 2005. That trend is causing carriers to bring game development in house, often by acquiring independents. He suggested that developers start looking in the mirror and asking if they want to be part of a big organization or stay smaller and independent. Applications other than games are starting to appeal to carriers, who, like sharks, need to keep moving to survive. There is no killer app yet, he said, but the developers who think about non-game tie-ins and apps are more likely to succeed. Such content might include ring-tones, wallpaper, or other branded content.

Publishers who deliver a suite of related games and apps will get a better reception from the carriers. He expects mobile development costs to double in 2005, mostly due to porting requirements, localization, the increasing use of 3D graphics, and a general increase in complexity.

In the open discussion, a few more interesting ideas were voiced. Extending the franchise of a successful PC/console game could be key to a popular mobile game, Estanislao pointed out. New games will make use of cell phone cameras, Miao prophesied, and developers should start thinking about how to make games that relate to where the user is, and make use of the imaging capabilities of the cameras in phones. Multiplayer games are very popular in Korea, Ballard told us, but have not caught on in the US at all. He expects this to change soon, and cited on-line poker games as an example of a concept that may lend itself to mobile development.

Ballard and Miao both talked about the market and demographics of the mobile game player. Miao sees the market splitting in two: high-end, largely 3D games, and simpler, less expensive and less immersive 2D titles. Ballard though, sees the market somewhat differently. The breadth of the mobile gaming market will require imagination and hard work to satisfy. There will be many types of games that will succeed. Keep in mind the basic demographic of the mobile game player, he said. It corresponds roughly to the demographics of those who have indoor toilets.

The whitepaper on which this panel was based will be available at no charge from the IGDA website by early April. Look for it at www.igda.org/online.

On the Game Developers Conference

2005-03-17T09:31:00.000-08:00

GDC 2005: An Educator’s View
By Jeffrey R. Abouaf

March 2005, San Francisco --- Last week I attended my tenth Game Developers’ Conference, this year held at San Francisco’s Moscone Center West. Still a conference by and for game developers, I’m struck how sophisticated it’s become in such a short time. The Visual Arts Track (where I spend most of my time) has advanced from generic and some specialized techniques for making lightweight models, textures and animation, to translating high end film assets and effects to a next-generation interactive medium with negligible change in quality. This raises fundamental issues across design and production spectrums.

The Faculty Summit

Electronic Arts conducted a Faculty Summit the first day of the Conference at it’s Redwood City facility. Attending were faculty from many colleges and universities, some of whom were partners with EA in their game development curricula; others had created such programs or were in the process of doing so. The candid presentation by EA concerning what and how it is preparing to face the next seven or so years, together with faculty descriptions of their programs, goals and challenges offered a surprisingly coherent picture of what to expect. Both likened the game industry to the film industry of the 1930’s. The “Next Gen” consoles will appear within a year, offering a 5-10x increase in computing power, and five years thereafter expect the generation after that. By 2012 the following hardware generation will be out. Developers will be producing titles inhabited by photoreal interactive characters, at HD resolution, using movie special effects on consoles with no noticeable power limits, (at least in today’s terms). Co-Founder and current head of EA Bing Gordon remarked that what EA seeks most from aspiring designers and developers are proposals for new features for existing games, not new game concepts. At gross revenues of about ¼ industry gross, EA wants to build the next blockbuster title (often inspired by feature films), and sequels for their current line up. With average budgets of $10 million and development teams of 200 in house, EA resembles the film studio models during Hollywood’s Golden Age.

EA is concerned with growing talent for Next Gen and Next Gen2 games. By 2012 they anticipate all their current assets and technologies will be replaced. To that end they have partnered with many universities and colleges, and are actively recruiting graduates. For example, they are involved with Carnegie Mellon’s recent MET program (Masters of Entertainment Technologies, presented by faculty head Randy Pausch), USC’s schools of film and television (where EA hopes to recruit new writers to interactive entertainment) and the University of Central Florida (where EA helped to convince the state to fund $5M for a new game curriculum and facility, and have pledged ongoing funding.) The more than 100 representatives and faculty present either have or are implementing their own game curricula. Their main concerns were (1) how to leverage their current resources from computer science and entertainment disciplines to a new program, and (2) how to guaranty the new courses or degree programs in game development will represent the same quality as their product from other fields.

Bandwidth, budgets, and believability

Not surprisingly, this large developer-institutional collaboration dovetails nicely with the Microsoft keynote, where they described a next generation Xbox aimed at HD interactivity. Likewise consistent was the session named “The Negotiation”, a quick presentation of a hypothetical deal between a large developer and a major publisher/licensing firm. Again, the example was a $10M budget and 10 month development period. The surprise is always how little remains for unfunded, however creative, talent, and how this result is explained by fixed expense and general risk-reward analysis. What emerges from all this is that Next Gen titles, while bigger, badder, more photoreal and complex, require enormous budgets, an army of talent, and consistent with the movie industry they are emulating, funding from deep pockets. The willingness to take risk decreases in inverse proportion to budget – only a handful of titles succeed.

Of course the art-related presentations focused on advanced techniques and production issues facing those working on “Next-Gen” titles. As computing power of platforms increase to remove graphical limitations, new issues arise: i.e. how to portray real-time photoreal interactive characters in HD resolution? How to populate these spaces with enough hi-res content? An obvious result is to generate characters procedurally. How does this effect the artist? PS1 titles restricted polygonal budgets to 800-1200 per main character and PS2 raised the bar to 5K – 8K polygons. I heard one artist on a Next Gen title comment that his character budget hadn’t increased that much, but now he has 8 characters in the scene at all times. It’s all speculation, as the hardware isn’t even out yet.

The technique classes followed what you’d expect from a film production advanced 3D seminar: edgeloop modeling to assure realistic skin deformation and believable animated nuance (Derek Elliot); advanced rigging to portray accurate inter-bone influences in skeletal movement (Paul Neal); scripting techniques that facilitate animation or even generate entire rigs and characters; making and reducing hi-definition digital sculpture to normal maps for added detail; authoring and deploying DirectX 9 shader technology within your 3D creation tool; and a favorite, Tips and Tricks by Kelsey Previtt, which always pop my eyes. In other words, bringing film techniques to real-time, but with all those added problems – oops, “challenges”. For the working artist, learn human anatomy like you never learned it, and draw, draw, draw.

Ed Hook’s put his finger on the problem with one hour on “You can’t MoCap the Soul – the problem with Eyes”. This subject, which easily could have spanned the entire day, raised the question of what happens as games include photoreal human characters. (I’d heard the EA art and technical directors describe this as “beyond photorealism” to “believability”). Hooks showed me that what sounds so obvious is much more complicated. He is the author of “Acting for Animators” (a must for the library for anyone serious in this area), an actor and teacher for 30 years, and a consultant to major game companies these last years. Personally unfamiliar with basic acting theory, I was struck by his analysis. For a character to connect with the audience, it must evoke empathy, meaning we understand the feelings – as opposed to sympathy where we may feel badly for the plight, but not feel the character’s experience. He then stated that in acting, “thinking leads to conclusions but feelings lead to action” That is, we experience the characters feelings by how he/she acts. Not so with games: the character looks, then acts – thinking leads to action. We can feel sympathy, not empathy. Without empathy, we cease suspension of disbelief. He also suggested player control is a factor: if our thoughts control the action (and not character feelings) we don’t empathize. This is exacerbated as characters become photoreal, because our “primate brain” shifts from fantasy-based to reality-based interpretation and reaction. The greater the realism, the more precise and less forgiving our scrutiny.

Solutions? Where independent feelings can’t drive the character, consider evoking empathy through other characters or the environmental cues. Create MoCap files using actors working from a script. After all, they are trained to portray feelings through action. For example, consider the difference between telling someone in a MoCap suit to get out of their chair quickly vs. instructing an actor they are sitting in a chair, which someone has just set on fire.

Valve, Inc.’s presentation on Half Life 2, (which won this year’s IGDA award), fit nicely with this thread. HL2 characters respond to you by looking at you, no matter how you enter a room, or what you do. Yet, things like eye contact, head, body and limb gesture, and interactions with other characters are very sophisticated, based on statistical data on human gestures, gestures unique for each character, and unique relationships between characters. HL2 animation breaks down to three components: generic animation implemented through AI, such as phonemes, general facial expressions; scripted gestures and body language movements unique to a particular character, but reusable; and artist keyframed animation, used for example to portray unique relationships between characters. The HL2 engine can blend this AI, scripted and keyframed animation non-linearly at runtime in a truly seamless way. Playing the same scene three times differently, we experienced the characters looking and talking to us, moving in their unique ways, and embracing each other – each time holding together as if uniquely keyframed, yet equally spontaneous in each instance. I found their multi-layered technological approach to Ed Hook’s intuitive, empirical observations inspiring –to say the least.

Counterpoint

The “Burning Down the House: Game Developers Rant” Session offered acid counterpoint to the EA summit and other sessions about mega-title production. As articulate and passionate as well known in the community, Greg Costikyan, Chris Hecker, Brenda Laurel, and Warren Spector entertained ranting on the current state of the industry. Like all blockbuster media, mega-games take an army of great talent to produce and distribute, but unlike other media, it’s distributed through a single channel – retail -- derisively referred to as Wal-Mart). Greg Costikyan ranted such titles can only be produced by or through large corporations and distributed by like heavyweights, with prime beneficiaries including the hardware manufacturers Microsoft and Sony. This leaves little creative freedom and opportunity for the independent developer, and perhaps less for the artist in their employ. Then Brenda Laurel raised the social issue (the only time I heard this raised during the conference). What role models are set out for the primary audience, young men? Professional Athlete. Soldier. Gangster/Street Thug. Wizard – maybe that one’s positive. I’m torn – and I wish more were – over the implications here. First and foremost I believe in protecting free expression as the bedrock of a free society, and am suspect of any forces, past or present, at work to skew, limit, or otherwise chill it. Yet we see how powerful forces manipulate media, and how media complies, to move this society to a scripted agenda. This industry is no more or less complicit. Calling it “entertainment” is not a complete defense to this responsibility, and putting a cute rating tag on the box evokes the same chuckle as it does when I see it on a movie. One answer of course is more content diversity, which at least in the near term, is not part of the current commercial direction.

But then nothing stands still. San Francisco has a long tradition of bohemian artistic energy, in my lifetime from the Beats through Multimedia Gulch, to today’s independent game developer. The IGDA and Independent Festival stood in for San Francisco’s customary independent (anarchic) creative energy, and I saw a lot of work unique for artistry and gameplay. As an artist, I enjoy the blockbuster and the independent, and marvel at both the grand as well as the intimate. But as an educator I feel a responsibility to open doors, with a protective conscience to remain mindful of the costs, even when my student is not. This differs from my thoughts only a few years ago when artist-developers were more empowered in a less mature industry. The maverick is being replaced by a professional -- more technically skilled and better suited to functioning in a big organization; better equipped to invent new features. To one concerned on readying today’s students for a coveted career in game development, enlisting a young person to incur $40-$100K in loans to land a $40K job (if they’re lucky) has a sobering ring.

I hope next year to attend the Serious Games Summit, an aspect of the conference dedicated to game technologies in the training space. Unfortunately the sessions were held the first two days of the conference and conflicted with others I needed to attend. This makes the case for organizers to record sessions, and make them available. The obvious and immediate benefits of serious games, together with industrial funding which assures their deployment, make expansion of this portion of the conference a “no-brainer” That said, my sincerest thanks to all connected with organizing this conference and bringing it to San Francisco, and to my contact, Sibel Sunar for her role over the years in presiding over more than anyone can take in, yet keeping it running so smoothly.

Stereographics sold to Real D

2005-02-28T21:49:00.000-08:00

Here's some news that knocked my socks off. Makes good sense, but still a big surprise.

REAL D Acquires StereoGraphics Corporation to Deliver the Premium Visual Experience for Entertainment and Other Industries

REAL D will set the Industry Standard for the Delivery of 3D Entertainment

Feb. 22, 2005, LOS ANGELES - REAL D, pioneering the industry standard for the delivery of premium stereoscopic experiences, today announced the acquisition of StereoGraphics Corporation, the world's leading inventor, manufacturer and supplier of stereoscopic hardware and software. REAL D will leverage StereoGraphics' 25 years of experience in developing mission-critical technologies for companies like NASA, Pfizer and Boeing to create the platinum-standard for stereoscopic experiences in the entertainment industry.

Through this acquisition, REAL D will become the first company to provide the entertainment industry with a multitude of solutions for the delivery of premium stereoscopic experiences capable of reaching sizeable audiences. Already, the REAL D solution is being enthusiastically embraced by executives in the entertainment, exhibition and advertising industries who are seeking competitive advantages to combat rising competition from other media, such as in-home theaters, cable and DVDs. The REAL D solution also allows exhibitors to realize additional revenue streams from the presentation of stereoscopic movies, alternative programming and high-impact advertising opportunities.

"StereoGraphics has an impeccable track record of delivering best-in-class stereoscopic technologies to leading companies worldwide," said Michael V. Lewis, Chairman, REAL D. "REAL D will harness StereoGraphics' vast scientific and manufacturing expertise to introduce new solutions for content creators and exhibitors who are seeking a competitive advantage in a rapidly changing entertainment industry."

Unlike traditional 3D projection technology that requires two projectors, the REAL D solution allows a single digital projector to play the highest quality stereoscopic content while remaining fully compatible with existing and future 2D digital formats. This model offers exhibitors the maximum flexibility in the types of content they wish to exhibit.

"For decades, the scientific, medical and manufacturing industries have relied on StereoGraphics' patented technology to advance their research and development," said Joshua Greer, CEO, REAL D. "Now, REAL D is applying these advancements achieved by StereoGraphics to architect the unparalleled visual experiences for audiences everywhere."

StereoGraphics, based in San Rafael, Calif., was founded by Lenny Lipton, the foremost pioneer in stereoscopic technology and prolific inventor holding patents in virtually every area of stereoscopic display technology. In 1996 Lipton received an award from the Smithsonian Institution for his invention of CrystalEyes®, the first practical electronic stereoscopic product for computer graphics and video applications. Lipton will become Chief Technology Officer of REAL D.

"I believe REAL D has the passion, leadership and vision to realize my original dreams for stereoscopic technology," said Lenny Lipton, founder of StereoGraphics and Chief Technology Officer of REAL D. "I'm ecstatic to work with the collective team to apply my expertise to forge new ground in the entertainment industry."

REAL D will announce the company's rollout strategy later this year.

About REAL D
REAL D, based in Los Angeles, provides premium visual experiences through
the pioneering and delivery of advanced visualization technologies for use in entertainment, marketing, science, research and other industries. For more information, visit www.REALD.com.

Another look at SIGGRAPH

2004-08-19T14:44:00.000-07:00

By Jeffrey R. Aboauf © 2004. Used with permission.

When I arrived at SIGGRAPH 2004 at the L.A. Convention Center August 8, the staffers boasted 42,000 registered. Maybe. Since my first in SIGGRAPH ’93, LA’s conference always drew the biggest crowd. This year, either the center grew or the show was smaller. [Editor’s note: Official attendance was 27,825 with 229 exhibitors, according to ACM SIGGRAPH.] But even in LA, size doesn’t always matter. I found presentations on social implementations more compelling than the many evolving technologies and techniques.

R.T. Taylor’s talk on the history and future of VF/x (visual special effects) at Discreet’s Masters Class series should have been the keynote before thousands, not a lounge act for 15 or so. Dazzled in youth by Willis O’Brian’s King Kong, a ‘60’s guerilla-psychedelic film-video artist, a long-time player in film effects (analog and digital), founding member of the Visual Effects Society and instructor at the Gnomon School, Taylor presented his personal take on the history of effects from before 1800 to the present. The traditional magician is our star, Taylor told us, fittingly the first F/x artist. This entertaining chronicle of technologies and ideas, one inspiring the other, always returns to the star who creates the magic. We relate to and want to be this person, and his/her historical milestones are left to guide us. Taylor’s final slide showed two same-size, old-style electronic switch-boxes, one on top of the other (I don’t think the position was relevant). The top one, labeled “Man”, had one on-off switch; the bottom one, “Woman” had all kinds of buttons, dials and switches. After the chuckles died down, Taylor suggested these represent two diverging F/x development paths: one set increasingly intelligent, capable, automatic and ubiquitous for use by everyone to communicate in all media; the other ever-more capable, complex, specialized, flexible, and cryptic for wizards on the edge. Earthshaking? Of course not. But I couldn’t communicate Hamlet’s meaning by saying “he dies at the end”. After this 90-minute presentation (I wished it had continued hours longer), this observation is the only possible result. We left reminded that, as artists and developers, our strategies lie along one of these paths, rarely along both.

Talks like this remind us how relative the VF/x industry is – i.e. that 19th century audiences were no less astonished by a still photo projected by a flickering flame than we are by summer movie extravaganzas. Audiences watching 40’s and ‘50’s WWII movies weren’t troubled by how miniature destroyers and subs failed to produce realistic water effects, so long as they saw it for the first time, and only once. It’s not about powerful images, only their power in context. The industry, however, has an impact other than offering transitory, disposable imagery – the expanding quantity and fidelity of imagery. About the former, Ray Harryhausen suggested that when special (VF/x) images are everywhere, none are special, or noticed. The cheap, available, and ubiquitous digital faux-realism as implemented by commercial and political interests, is increasingly disturbing. I’m not arguing that Grand Theft Auto produces Columbine-like events. I’m suggesting that Jonathan Demme’s remake of The Manchurian Candidate speaks to how this industry serves up a digital Hell, where the lessons of past scandals serve only as primers for more successful efforts to perpetrate fraud, deceit, and schemes for political advantage.

Ironically, however empowering digital technology becomes, it seems to disempower artists in inverse proportion to the gains. I heard Michael Waddington present this argument at the 1995 3D Design Conference. He noted that in 1980 artists served at the pleasure and direction of the “suits”; that computer technology spawned a generation of techno-wizards who held new creative and economic power; and that we should expect the technology to produce more artists and cheaper delivery, which will restore the prior power structure. Only this time the artist will have to know more to hold a job. I wonder if he expected his prophesy to come true in less than a decade. The dot-com bust gave us the flip side of Supply-Side economics, i.e. taking away the supply of employers puts artists out of work. The competition for project work in movies and games is as fierce as a generation ago for artists in entertainment, and quite the opposite of what it was in the early ‘90’s.

You don’t have to be political to recognize that working in this industry, like any, has consequences, to artists and to the culture. The VF/x product is disposable and transitory; the effect is cumulative from collective authorship. There’s not much we can do to effect the momentum, which feeds my cynicism.

There’s another trend – one which made me optimistic. Christian Bauer spoke about the World Summit Award™, an initiative of the European Academy of Digital Media and the International Center for New Media, to recognize, showcase and exhibit “the best in e-Content and Creativity” from contributors around the world. (http://www.wsis-award.org/) Their mission is to reach populations otherwise invisible and technologically disenfranchised:

A truly Global Information Society is one where all persons, without distinction, are empowered freely to create, receive, share and utilize information and knowledge for their economic, social, cultural and political development.

The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), held in Geneva in December 2003 and in Tunis in 2005, offers a historical opportunity to realize this vision.

The World Summit Award, a global project, held in the framework of the WSIS, seeks to demonstrate the benefits of the Information Society in terms of the new qualities in content and applications, by selecting, presenting and promoting the best products from all over the world with a special emphasis on bridging the digital divide.

In their first year, the WSA was given an audience before the United Nations, which along with other efforts, resulted in 136 signing nations, each making a commitment to drawing content from their populations. (Compare this with SIGGRAPH’s current 124 nation involvement, after its many years.) I don’t expect signing heads of state in poorer countries to draw from all segments of their society. But then they aren’t entirely responsible for soliciting participation. For example, there’s a fine piece submitted by a group of Ugandan women – not mainstream, but special and unique. Surprisingly (or not) the U.S. is not yet a signatory.

Bauer, (WSA project manager and member of the SIGGRAPH International Committee ’96-’04), is working to publicize WSA efforts in this country by organizing a road show for the 2003 competition in U.S. exhibition spaces. I hope the many colleges and multimedia schools present this year that have the facilities are joined by others in our industry who step up to serve their students and communities by hosting this exhibit. The WSA was a small presence in the conference international center this year. I hope their egalitarian vision gains a bigger voice in our community.

Other items of interest

To be sure there were noteworthy product announcements, which I know will be discussed in many other publications. A few items caught my current mood and interest:

Discreet previewed 3DS Max 7, set for Fall release. They wowed the faithful with demos of new Normal Mapping and Pixel-based Camera Map Tools, Edit Poly Modifier and enhancements to Editable Poly, Paint Selections and Paint Deform, Skin Morph and Skin Wrap Deformer, and a Parameter Controller. There’s a lot more: www4.discreet.com/Files/3dsmax/3dsmax_tech.pdf.
Naturalmotion’s endorphin 1.6, an update to their high-end dynamic motion synthesis tool, is characterized by sophisticated AI applied to bipedal characters. This enables physically accurate character simulations with controllable, believable secondary motion, without use of motion capture or key framing. Huh? Well, when a rag doll falls down a flight of stairs, it goes limp. A character modified by endorphin will curl up, protect its head, and fall other than just by the effects of collision and gravity. In another demo, a scene imported from Max (without dynamics data), a character leaps to grab a helicopter, resulting not only in the character’s physics driving his movements, but his impact on the helicopter effecting its trajectory, which in turn drives the character movement. Right now endorphin is priced around $13,000. But look to see this driving development. Great demos here: www.naturalmotion.com/pages/demos.htm
Luxology’s new 3D modeling product, modo, was on the floor for the first time this year. This may be the easiest and most advanced polygonal and subdivision surface modeler out there, and a joy to use in generating/updating morph targets. These veteran Lightwave developers have come up with a little jewel – fast, easy, elegant, full-featured modeling and UVW mapping set. In its first release includes built-in export support of the .MA format (Maya’s ASCII file), the .lwo format, and the OBJ format, as well as for material tags, blend shape data, UV safety. In addition, because modo uses Perl for its scripting language, users are able to further expand its connectivity. More info: www.luxology.com/modo
Eyeon software previewed Fusion 5, noteworthy for taking the 3D compositing environment one step further – not just composite planes transformable in 3D space, but allowing 2D objects to move along spline paths in XYZ space. i.e. to have text deform on a circular path around a character’s head, (so it looks bent and is always part obscured by the head) you simply draw a circular spline oriented in 3D space and attach a text object to it. More at: www.eyeonline.com/Web/EyeonWeb/Products/teasers/fusion5/teaser_fusion5.aspx.

I regret not having time to attend many panels, papers and courses – they’ve usually told me the research going on and what to expect in the next six months. My take? The digital revolution in entertainment and communication is replaced by an evolutionary march toward broader, faster, cheaper, better. SIGGRAPH ’93 showcased Jurassic Park made on SGI machines with Alias, Softimage and proprietary software. Pixar made shorts and commercials. AutoDesk sold 3D Studio DOS 4, new with IK features. The internet kiosk provided dedicated text-based terminals. Now almost every product is Wintel-based, digital technology dominates every phase of movie, broadcast, game, VizSim, and online activity, and I could connect to the net anywhere in the convention center with WiFi. Schools for targeted DCC training with veteran instructors are everywhere, and the discussion has moved to graduate degrees in VF/x.

A clear presentation of where we come from (for perspective), together with a notion that this is being delivered to more than the middle class and the techno-rich (a promise of more equal participation) offer some hope that the jewels of our industry might not just drive scientific advancement and commercial activity, but serve cultural appreciation and exchange. Taking stock of this industry, its history and effects lets us go forward with eyes open on how the product is used, as well as what voices can be heard.

Marc De Groot

2004-08-19T14:01:00.000-07:00

I was stunned to learn this morning of the passing of Marc De Groot, age 45, a pioneer in VR and a Bay Area fixture in the VR community for many years.

Marc started working with VR in 1990. He was a senior staff engineer at VPL Research, the first commercial VR company. Marc was later the Chief Scientist at Ono-Sendai Corporation. Ono-Sendai's goal was to produce a networked VR consumer appliance, but they were years ahead of their time. He was also instrumental in the development of VRML, and went on to develop and promote Meme, an easy to use, small footprint web-VR development system, which he placed into the public domain.

Marc was energetic, smart, and always provacative in the best of ways. I enjoyed his company and felt that he was a thought leader in the community. I, and many others, will miss him greatly.

Here is the text of his obituary, as published in the San Francisco Chronicle of August 19, 2004:

DE GROOT, Marc - In Taos, NM, August 8, 2004. Age 45. Beloved son of Barbara and Louis de Groot; brother of David de Groot. Nephew, cousin and friend to many. Born in Brooklyn, NY on July 2, 1959, and grew up in Dutchess and Rockland Counties NY and Paris, France. Settled in the Bay Area in 1978. A too tender-hearted soul, mostly self educated, with a brilliant and inquisitive mind who was a mathematical wizard and pioneer in the use of Virtual Reality Modeling Language. Founder of Immersive Systems, Inc. Created Meme, a development system for virtual world software. He contributed to, without remuneration, the technology which had a huge impact on disabled children - that enabled them to move around in his virtual world using only their facial muscles or other input, and thereby broadened their horizons. Within minutes of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake he was at the disposal of SF General Hospital with his mobile amateur radio station to ensure their communications capability. Services were held at Rolling Hills Memorial Park, Richmond, CA. Donations to the Marc de Groot Mental Health Fund, c/o Oakland Jewish Philanthropical Foundation, 1850 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Suite 370, Walnut Creek, CA 94596-4423.

So long Marc. The VizSim community is poorer for your passing.

3D manufacturing with a web interface? Why not?

2004-08-18T16:48:00.000-07:00

I just saw this and think it's the coolest thing since sliced bread. Now you can design 3D parts, send your design over a web interface, and get a manufactured part back. This is not just for professionals, either. Check it out. Tres cool!

eMachineShop.com World’s First Online Factory

Enables Instant Design and Delivery of Custom Mechanical Parts

Average 40 Hours of Engineering and Administrative Time For Single Custom Part Reduced to Only 15 Minutes

Midland Park, NJ – June 21, 2004 – eMachineShop (www.emachineshop.com) is believed to be the world’s first online factory enabling any company, organization or individual to design, price, and instantly order any mechanical part. From initial contact to placing an order, the entire process takes as little as 15 minutes.

According to Jim Lewis, eMachineShop president, “Whether you are designing a new part or are in need for more of an existing part, getting custom parts is time consuming and costly. Until now, you had to buy and learn expensive and complex CAD software, make technical drawings, locate a machine shop, find a way to transmit the drawings to the machine shop, discuss the design with an accomplished machinist, sift through numerous price quotations, and eventually get your part – often paying much more than necessary while adding weeks of delay.”

As value of manufactured goods output reaches $1 trillion every month* online custom parts expected to grow exponentially

Mr. Lewis added, “eMachineShop is an innovative solution offering the easiest, most cost-effective way to turn ideas into real 3D parts at both prototype and production quantities. Whether for a new invention, an existing product or construction of a space rocket, eMachineShop revolutionizes the whole process. In just it’s first two quarters of operation, eMachineShop has produced parts for electronic panels, enclosures, signs, scientific devices, parts for airplanes, cars, motorcycles and trucks, ocean buoys, sensor mechanics and cameras.

“The value of manufactured goods in April, 2004 was $989 billion*. As the global economy continues to recover, online manufacturing services such as eMachineShop have enormous potential. Barely out of the starting gate, eMachineShop has already processed nearly 1,000 orders,” Mr. Lewis commented.

eMachineShop at-a-glance

To begin, users download eMachineShop’s free CAD software. During the design phase, eMachineShop’s automated machining expert analyses the shape, material and finish to keep the user informed of any physical limitations, thereby making it easy for engineers and non-technical people to successfully design parts.

A built-in software expert system provides step-by-step guidance through the process, often totally eliminating the need for expensive engineering support and the associated delays, saving even more time and money. For example, if a sheet metal bend is too close to an edge, the software will advise the user in seconds.

A 3D preview helps visualize the final part before ordering. From the customer’s screen to delivery at the customer’s door, eMachineShop takes care of everything totally transparently. “Although not as fast, it’s almost like the transporter in Star Trek,” said Mr. Lewis.

eMachineShop currently offers CNC milling, turning, punching, blanking, laser cutting, plastic extrusion, thermoforming, tapping, bending, water jet cutting, wire EDM and will soon add injection molding. Surface finishes include brushing, plating, powder coating, anodizing, polishing, grinding, and more. Materials range from a broad selection of metals, plastics, woods, composites and others.

eMachineShop is a subsidiary of Micro Logic, a privately held technology organization located at 666 Godwin Avenue, Midland Park, NJ 07432. Telephone 201-447-9120. Web site: www.emachineshop.com.

*National Association of Manufacturers, Statistics section, www.nam.org

SIGGRAPH 2004 - Day 4

2004-08-12T00:35:00.000-07:00

SIGGRAPH, Wednesday, night four, Los Angeles – Today I completed my tour of the exhibit floor, and didn’t find much more that was really interesting. SIGGRAPH has continued to be a show of evolutionary progress. Yes, the graphics boards are blazingly fast. Yes, the trackers are better and less expensive. Yes, the computers are better and less expensive. But where in past years we would find amazing progress from year to year, now, and for the past few years, we see only incremental change. A good thing, yes, but not particularly exciting, and not much to write home about.

But don’t give up hope. I did see a very interesting program that adds AI to motion or keyframe data to make much more realistic motion than either type of data alone.

The program, from Natural Motion, is called endorphin. (Brief rant: Why do marketing directors think it is cool to use lower-case letter for product names? It sure makes it hard to write about them. Oh well.) Endorphin accepts mocap or keyframe information, and allow you to add smart behaviors to it on a timeline, something like video editing. For example, instead of a pushed figure just falling over, it may stagger, throw out its arms to break the fall, or curl up into a fetal position. Or it may do all three. And if the direction of the motive force changes, the behaviors change appropriately. The package also enables multiple characters to interact, demonstrated as a football tackle that was extremely believable. This system creates extremely natural-looking actions, and seems to be quite easy to use. I compared Endorphin to some other systems, and it seemed to deliver much better looking actions.

Finally, tonight I attended the Electronic Theater, where SIGGRAPH presents what it considers the very best animation of the previous year. This year’s program was the strongest in a long time, and included three good scientific examples, which I think are very important, and in recent years pretty much ignored.

I also enjoyed a short piece called Rock the World, which showed George W. Bush, Colin Powell, and other members of the current US administration playing rock music. It was very tongue in cheek, and very funny.

Finally, Chris Landreth showed his latest work, the much-anticipated Ryan. This piece tells the tragic story of Ryan Larkin, a pioneering animator who fell into the abyss of drug addiction, and now survives by panhandling on the streets of Montreal. Landreth interviewed Larkin at length, and made a sort of animated documentary about the guy. The animation has the classic Landreth magic, and this story is very moving. Frankly, I think this is one of the best films of any sort I have seen in a long time, and I’ll stick my neck out and predict it will garner an Academy Award. I think Landreth has fortified his position as one of the most inventive and evocative story tellers alive, in any medium. If you get a chance, see Ryan. And if you get a chance, go back and see The End and Bingo, two of Landreth’s earlier works that are the foundation for the incredible surrealistic style and methods he employs in Ryan. This is great work.

Tomorrow is the last day for SIGGRAPH, and I will report on it only if I see something new or exciting. I hope you have found these reports valuable. I welcome your comments and suggestions. Be well.

SIGGRAPH 2004 - Day 3

2004-08-11T01:04:00.000-07:00

SIGGRAPH, Tuesday, night three, Los Angeles – The conference exhibit opened today, and the crowds must have been a big relief to the SIGGRAPH committee. Talk yesterday was that there didn’t seem to be many people around. However, this is typical for Mondays at SIGGRAPH, as the people who are there are there for the tutorials and other presentations. That means they are in the meeting rooms, and out of sight. Today, they were around, and the exhibit hall was crowded all day. Here’s a picture of the hall that gives you an idea of the crowds.

My first appointment of the day was with Oregon 3D (O3D) president Aaron Boonshoft, (Disclosure: I have worked with Oregon 3D in the past.) O3D is a training and visualization facility in Portland Oregon. Aaron told me that O3D will begin offering an Urban Planning Simulation curricula this fall. This is possibly the first private training organization to offer this increasingly important option. Simulation is being used in Urban Planning as both a conventional planning tool, and also as part of security preparations. I think this course offering marks an important step in vocational education.

An interesting note on how the pecking order at SIGGRAPH changes: this year the two biggest booths on the floor are those of Apple Computer and Alias. SGI has a barely larger than average exhibit, a sad commentary on the changes that have left many of the leading graphics companies of a few years ago sitting in the dust. And by the way, in place of the SGI iron that used to dominate the floor at SIGGRAPH, one is seeing Apple systems all over the place. I guess their switch the UNIX-based OS X has paid of in the graphics community.

Speaking of Apple’s computers, I went to an introductory presentation tonight by a company named Luxology LLC, based in San Mateo, California. They showed an impressive new 3D modeling program called modo, that was incredibly fast, running on dual-processor G5s. Modo was designed, they told us, after extensive consultation with 3D modelers using a variety of programs. The team that put modo together is comprised of Lightwave graduates, and seemed to be aiming directly at the Maya market, as modo exports in Maya format. I’m not a 3D modeler, but I have seen plenty of demos, and I can assure you that this program is fast, and it looks like its functionality is high and ease of use exceptional. Modo is due out this fall in Mac and Windows versions, and priced at $895, has the potential to be a winner in the heavily fragmented 3D modeling marketplace.

Two thoughts on displays at SIGGRAPH. First, this seems to be the year of autostereoscopic displays (ASDs). The Web3D Consortium has a half a dozen LCD-based ASDs from different manufacturers in their booth; Actuality Systems and Lightspace are showing their volumetric displays; and Kodak is showing their mirror-based system. (Disclosure: Kodak is a current client of mine.) This year’s CyberEdge report on the VizSim/VR Market showed that 7.6% of our respondents bought or sold ASDs, and I think they are starting to become a significant part of the display market.

Finally, I saw a very interesting multi-LCD display system from Seamless Display. They assemble three (or almost any number) of thin-bezel LCDs behind a proprietary lens set that spans all of the monitors. The lenses hide the bezels and make the display look like one large monitor. This is a fairly simple concept, but it looks great. Here’s a picture.

That’s it for today. Tomorrow, I continue to prowl the exhibits, and see the Electronic Theater program. I’ll let you know what I find.

SIGGRAPH 2004 – Day 2

2004-08-10T00:39:00.000-07:00

SIGGRAPH, Monday, night two, Los Angeles – Today was my day for casing the convention center to see where things are and start checking out the show. I ran into my old friend Jeff Abouaf, a great artist and 3D Studio Max expert (www.ogle.com) and we went through the Emerging Technologies area together. We also listened to Bruce Stirling speak for a bit, and frankly, we were both amazed and what a pointless bunch of hot air he had to spew. I frankly had no idea what he was talking about, but he sure went on (and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and…)

Anyway, perhaps the most notable item in Emerging Technologies was the nationality of what seemed like a majority of the presenters. It seemed that every exhibit was staffed by Japanese students. This raises the question: what is happening in America’s schools? Are our students turned off to computers, or, as I think is more likely, are we seeing the result of years of denigrating education, turning out increasingly ill-informed, and frankly ignorant kids. I am increasingly appalled by our de-emphasis of education in the USA, and extremely worried that we are throwing away our future by refusing to educate our children. We need to put money in to our education system, or else we will live to see a future of ever-worse decision-making made by ever-stupider political, business, and civic leaders. End of rant.

On of my favorite exhibits in the Emerging Technologies gallery was from Hiroo Iwata’s University of Tsukuba lab. I am a long-time fan of Dr. Iwata-san’s work. His lab has consistently demonstrated some of the most creative, and often frankly weird, interface devices shown at SIGGRAPH. This year, his team is showing a device, called CirculaFloor, that allows one to walk (somewhat normally) in a virtual world. This is accomplished by having three moving platforms, each about 3 inches high and about 24 inches square, upon which one steps, one foot on each. The trick is that as one steps off the last platform, into thin air, the third one rolls around to place itself in front of the one from which you are stepping, putting itself under your descending foot. It’s damn weird, but incredibly clever, and a lot of fun. I’m not sure what a real-life application of this system would be, but once again, Iwata-san’s team has shown one of the most imaginative and out-of-the-box concepts at the show. Click here to see a brief QuickTime movie of the device in action. (Note: this is a 5.7 MB file.)

Another very cool exhibit, called Swimming Across the Pacific, was developed by Human Communications Technologies Lab at the University of British Columbia. This is a VR system, inspired by a stunt in which a swimmer swam in a pool aboard an ocean liner as it traversed the Atlantic. A team lead by Sidney Fels developed a system in which a head-mounted display-wearing user is suspended in a hang-glider harness with position sensors (from Polhemus) attached to his arms, legs, and head. Hoisted into the air, the victim, I mean user, then is able to swim, seeing his progress as water splashes around him in a realistic manner. Screens allow spectators to see that the water responds to the speed and violence of the swimmer’s motions. An interesting application, with potential application as a training system. Here's a picture of the Swimming system.

Finally, two duds. As usual, the SIGGRAPH art show is a complete disappointment. The art mostly seems trite and derivative, and if it hadn’t been made with computers, would be completely unworthy of note. Well, actually, it is almost all completely unworthy of note.

The other dud was the Realtime 3DX: Demo or Die presentation. This was the remnant of the Web 3D Roundup, with far less funding. However, the production, MC’d by Sandy Nessler, was fine, and the new scoring system, which used laser pointers to point at yes or no choices for each demo was innovative and fun. But by in large the presentations were uninteresting and/or impractical, and most looked like things we saw five or ten years ago, but with better graphics. It’s no wonder that 3D on the web hasn’t taken off – no has to this day figured out what to do with it.

Tomorrow is the first day of the exhibit, which I feel is the most valuable part of SIGGRAPH. I’ll be reporting then what I saw that was great, or not.

SIGGRAPH 2004 - Day 1

2004-08-09T12:01:00.000-07:00

SIGGRAPH, Sunday, night one, Los Angeles – I got in late tonight after flying down form Oakland. Thought I’d check out the Fig, the Figeroa Hotel, always the hot spot when SIGGRAPH is in LA. Tonight, unexpectedly, there was a party, sponsored by Ars Electronica, the Austrian art and technology conference held in Linz in September. I ran into my old friend Christian Bauer, as well as Michael Naimark, Gerfried Stocker, and Christine Schöpf, all involved with the festival. It was good to catch up with them.

Ars Electronica was a leading edge meeting, but in the past few years has been plagued by weak themes and questionable art. This year they brought in Michael Naimark, who is perhaps best known for the Movie Map created years ago as one of the first interactive, computer-mediated video pieces. Michael is putting together a program addressing the ways technology will change society in 25 years – an appropriate number as the festival itself is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year.

I am staying this year at the Milner Hotel on Flower street. It is just about five blocks from the Convention Center, and while not at all “cool”, reminds me of many European businessman’s hotels I’ve stayed at. It’s clean and comfortable, and breakfast is included, as it should be at any civilized place of lodging. The room is small, but all I do is sleep there, so I don’t care. Rates are reasonable, and the location is fine. Next time you’re in LA, check it out.

The Failure of VizSim

2004-07-21T17:58:00.001-07:00

© Ben Delaney 2003
www.CyberEdge.com

This story was written in March of 2003 for a newsletter whose publisher refused to print it due to its political nature. We ask that you form your own opinion of its value and present it here as it was offered for publication.

As recent events in Iraq have shown, VizSim has one major failing as a training technology. That soft spot has become increasingly obvious as US and UK troops take casualties, and as an Apache helicopter is downed by men with rifles. That failure is a failure of imagination. As we used to say in the programming business, before a bunch of internet wiz kids showed us how to make money without making products, garbage in, garbage out. Our recent imbroglios in Iraq demonstrate that that principal still holds. The best technology in the world, which the US military certainly has, is no replacement for a lack of imagination, a refusal to consider all possibilities, and a phalanx of yes-men.

From the New York Times of March 25, 2003:

To set the stage for the assault [on Baghdad], the United States military hammered Iraqi radar and tried to suppress surface-to-air missiles. But the Iraqis had a low-tech solution: they deployed a large number of irregular fighters who were equipped with machine guns and small arms.

As the helicopters took off, they flew low off the ground to make themselves less inviting targets for surface-to-air missiles. But that made them vulnerable to the small-arms fire. Thirty of 32 Apache helicopters were struck by small-arms fire.

One helicopter went down [near Karbala], and its two-man crew was captured. The Army was so concerned that the Iraqis would get their hands on the technology that they fired two ATACMS missiles today to destroy the helicopter. Because of bad weather after the action, the military had no report on whether they succeeded.

The Apaches destroyed only 10 to 15 Iraqi armored vehicles. American military commanders say they are rethinking their helicopter tactics as a result of the events of the past 24 hours.

In a video game, dying doesn't hurt. But on a real battlefield, with an angry enemy firing live rounds, death is final, and tragic.

A few days later, on Thursday, March 27, 2003 Lt. Gen. William Wallace, commander of U.S. Army forces in the Persian Gulf, made a much-quoted comment that raised hackles all over Washington DC. Talking about the fierce and guerrilla-style resistance of Iraqi militia groups, Wallace said, "The enemy we're fighting is a bit different than the one we war-gamed against."

GIGO

Garbage In, Garbage Out. GIGO. That was a popular catchphrase when I started programming computers, way back in the last Ice Age. The hoariness of the adage does not reduce its truth. What you get out of a computer program is only as good as what you put in.. Every generation, it seems, has to learn this truth for it self, as witnessed by the never-ending software flaws and screw-ups that we poor computer users are forced to tolerate. Every engineering task is limited by the quality of the assumptions and data that form its basis. If those assumptions, or the assumptions on which they are based, or the assumptions on which those assumptions are based - well you get the picture - are bad, or if the data used to form an assumption is bad, or if the logic used to process the data is bad, well, garbage in, garbage out.

In my years as a programmer and systems analyst, I saw three primary reasons for bad assumptions leading to a GIGO situation. They are optimism, ignorance, and laziness.

Optimism is almost never appropriate when planning an engineering project, be it hardware, software, or highway construction. Optimism leads to too-tight schedules, expectations of instant success, and under-budgeting. Optimism causes one to believe that certain bad things won't happen and that other good things will happen.

Optimism is what causes managers to ignore warnings of possible trouble spots, reduce time for developing error-trapping routines, provide time and budget estimates that are too small, and to hire too few people to get a job done. Optimism leads to frantic pushes to make deadlines. Optimism I what caused NASA's shuttle flight managers to say, "that light-weight piece of insulation couldn't have hurt the shuttle". Optimism is what made US war planners expect the Iraqi people to welcome our troops with open arms. Optimism is good as a life philosophy, and lousy as an engineering protocol.

Ignorance, and its corollary, hubris, are often the root causes of undue optimism. Engineers who graduate school without ever having built anything will be ignorant of the gut-level knowledge of what is strong enough, reliable enough, foolproof enough. Ignorance leads to bad specifications. Ignorance leads to ignoring otherwise well-known problems, and their solutions. Ignorance wastes time by causing the wheel to be reinvented thousands of times - as we have seen recently during the dot-com bubble, when ignorant kids developed applications and tools over and over because they didn't know the problems had already been solved. Ignorance leads to awful demos of products that may have applicability, if only the people promoting them knew the least bit about their potential customers. Ignorance creates simulations that do not simulate the real world, but look absolutely lovely on a big screen.

Laziness is considered a cardinal sin by the go-getters of commerce and industry. In many ways they are right. Laziness leads one to cut corners, and when combined, as it often is, with ignorance, can cause fatal errors. In software development, laziness is often manifested in inadequate testing, especially of unlikely error conditions. There were scores of times during my programming career that I was told that certain errors could never happen, or that certain combinations of conditions could never exist. Almost inevitably, those errors arose, and those conditions coalesced, and the system crashed as a result. My managers were too lazy to test for those possibilities, and they ultimately paid the price, in system failures, busted budgets, and poor reviews. But those were just software projects for banks and insurance companies and non-critical systems. Laziness in wartime is often fatal. Unfortunately, it is often the grunt in the trench who pays for a manager's laziness with his life.

War Game GIGO

Let's think again about General Wallace's remark. "The enemy we're fighting is a bit different than the one we war-gamed against." Taken on its face, this remark is not surprising or unusual. After all, it is impossible to model and simulate every possible scenario. Nearly every real-life situation will differ from its simulation in some aspect. But when the situation is a ground fight on foreign territory, against an enemy fighting to protect his own soil, we need to be sure that every possibility, no matter how remote, is evaluated, and that we thoughtfully and honestly assess the potential for each scenario to unfold.

However, General Wallace points out an error created by optimism, ignorance, hubris, and even possibly by laziness. As such, it serves as an excellent example of how not to do war gaming, which these days is all based on simulation and VizSim. The issue is not the quality of the simulation, or the clarity of the displays, or the integrity of the programmers. The issue is ignorance of what was likely to happen on the ground in Iraq, optimism that we would find the best possible scenario unfolding, and hubris in forming our assumptions.

Reports of the battle to reach Baghdad remind me of my American history lessons. We learned, during our study of the Revolutionary War, that the British commanders were amazed and disgusted by the Colonials' tactics. It seem that our forebears refused to stand and fight like the honorable British did. No, our forces used what we now call asymmetrical warfare tactics: hiding behind cover, ambushing British troops, striking quickly and unexpectedly and moving on. Well by golly, what a surprise - the overmatched Iraqi troops used these very same techniques against our troops. And they had some of the same successes the American Colonials had against the completely superior British regulars.

Could we have foreseen this resistance? Of course we could have. Could we have built it into our war games, and trained our commanders and forces to deal with it? Of course. Did we? Apparently not well enough.

Let us also remember the potential problems of a 300 kilometer-long supply line through hostile territory. One wonders how well that was simulated, and how many different scenarios were played out regarding that contingency.

Now, I don't mean to put all the blame for bad simulation on the military. I know and admire many of the dedicated people who plan and create these training systems, and I know that they do their best to do a good job. The problem is not theirs alone, and it is not isolated in the military. The root of bad simulation is usually in the executive offices. The techniques to avoid bad simulations are well known. The will to implement them is what is lacking.

Remember Murphy

"If anything can go wrong, it will go wrong." Thus sayeth the immortal Murphy, whose law we must remember if we are not to suffer the consequences. Designers of simulations obtain no absolution from Murphy's strictures. Thorough testing involves not just looking at likely problems, but thinking of the least likely problems, the highly unlikely problems, the unusual situations, the 100-year incidents, the extremely rare incidents, in short, whatever could go wrong. Then, a good tester, tests what couldn't possibly go wrong. Nonetheless, something will probably still go wrong.

If you are simulating financial flows, or a baseball game, or the reaction of Gorgons to your new mega-blaster, oversights in testing will cause problems ranging from inconvenience to a few dollars misplaced. But if you are simulating the actions of enemy troops under attack, sloppy testing leads to sloppy training, and sloppy training leads to dead soldiers.

Of course, all of this assumes that the initial planning is good, and that all of the likely scenarios are in fact built in to the simulation and tested. A rear action by angry locals is not unlikely when one is invading a sovereign state. But from General Wallace's comments, one might assume that that contingency was ignored. Blame that omission on optimism and hubris. But the testers should have picked it up.

The lack of imagination, or in the vernacular "thinking outside the box" is inexcusable in designing a military sim. I wasn't there, but I bet that during a design review for a training simulator, a bunch of captains and majors told some general exactly what he wanted to hear. Apparently, he wanted to hear that the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms. Apparently that is not what happened. Did no one have the guts to suggest a less pleasant alternative? Or was that suggestion put back "in the box," judged too unlikely?

The bottom line remains the same in software development, or any engineering project. Garbage in, garbage out. Simulation has no immunity. The only way to make good VizSim is to stay on top of the three foils - optimism, ignorance, and laziness. Are your engineers being given the direction and time to deal with these problems? If they aren't you had better make time to fix things later, because you certainly will have to.

I just hope no one is shooting at the people who use your simulation.

Sixth annual VizSim/VR market study published by CyberEdge Information Services

2004-07-15T11:28:00.000-07:00

Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality Has Evolved from Science Fiction to a $40+ Billion Mainstream Industry… Sixth Annual Industry Report by CyberEdge Pinpoints Areas of Growth and Opportunity.

Counter-Terrorism Training, Disaster Recovery, Energy Exploration, and Chemical Manufacturing are among Top Applications of the Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality Industry, New Report Finds.

Industry value up about 9%. Anti-Terrorism Spending up more than 75%.

Oakland, Calif. – Publication of the latest edition of CyberEdge Information Services’ annual market report, The Market for Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality Systems, Sixth Edition (ISBN: 1-929696-07-8) was announced today by company president Ben Delaney.

Recognized internationally as the world’s longest-running, statistically valid study of the industry, this new report analyzes the applications and finances of the industry globally. The report, with 271 pages, including 165 tables and 104 charts, provides an in-depth look at the seventy–five major applications that made the virtual reality/visual simulation (VizSim) industry worth nearly $43 billion world-wide in 2003, up by 8.9% compared to 2002. Both an Executive Summary and the full report are available for purchase directly from CyberEdge.

According to the report, international applications of VizSim range from entertainment to military, from medicine to trade show planning. “This once-science-fiction technology is now an essential part of design, training, defense, and entertainment around the world,” said Ben Delaney, founder of CyberEdge.

The continuing war on terror is being advanced by VizSim in several areas, including disaster recovery training, hazardous materials handling, counter-terrorism training, and a variety of military training applications. Together, fourteen military and civilian applications of VizSim to the war on terror comprised more than $8 billion in industry revenue in 2003, up more than 75% from 2002.

The Medical/Biotech Sector contributed another $8.7 billion to worldwide VizSim revenue. Other top applications of VizSim are chemical manufacturing, business data visualization, psychotherapy, construction planning and design, energy exploration and production, archeology and paleontology, biotechnology research, medical research, and training for heavy equipment operations. These applications accounted for more than $16 billion in revenue in 2003.

The Market for Visual Simulation/Virtual Reality Systems, Sixth Edition is based on questionnaires completed by respondents from 17 countries. They provided over 41,000 data points, which are analyzed in the report. Previous editions of the report have been purchased by Fortune 500 enterprises, small, fast-track companies, government agencies, and educational institutions globally, including Hewlett Packard, IBM, Iowa State University, Kodak, LG Electronics, SGI, Siemens, SONY, Sun Microsystems, and Texas Instruments, among others.

CyberEdge Information Services, Inc. provides market research, marketing consultation, presentations, and commentary on the VizSim/VR industry and other emerging technologies, and works with clients around the world to help companies develop new products and understand the markets in which they compete. Founded in 1991, CyberEdge is an trusted source of reliable, objective information for and about high technology.

For more information, or to purchase the report, visit www.CyberEdge.com or contact CyberEdge at 407 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, Oakland, CA 94607, +1 510 419-0800, info@CyberEdge.com.