I wonder if things like mass-spring mesh models use Bezier curves; otherwise, it seems very costly to re-calculate everything due to one affected area
KevinXu02
To simulate cloth's physical features, I think it is unavoidable to recalculate everything in time steps, otherwise, it might be hard to cheat human eyes.
AlsonC
I wonder if the predictable nature of modeling something like a cloth is noticeable after a lot of repeated iterations.
Mehvix
I wonder if/how numerical precision effects deterministic simulation
SadhikaA
The mass spring mesh reminds me of the Bézier curves that we studied earlier. After a quick search, I found that it turns out we can make meshes using Bézier curves.
vivek3141
I'm curious to see how different interpolation schemes between the anchors affects the visuals provided by moving the mesh around. I suspect that it's not too much.
emily-xiao
Adding on to discussion about Bezier curves relative to the mass-spring mesh - integrating Bezier curves into mass-spring meshes could potentially streamline the visualization of the mesh by smoothing the representation of dynamic elements. However, the core simulation fidelity hinges on accurately calculating forces, which means the computational savings might primarily benefit the visual layer rather than the simulation's physics calculations.
Songbird94
I’m very interested in seeing implementations of this
muuncakez
@AlsonC
After HW4 and messing with the renders for fun, the calculated nature of a simulation does begin to tarnish the cheat played on the human eye. It becomes easier with each simulation to "anticipate" the fabric, its bounces, how it bounces and folds, etc. and it does make things look a little uncanny with the right settings (like the stiffer the fabric, the harder it is to trick my eye that this is fabric)
I wonder if things like mass-spring mesh models use Bezier curves; otherwise, it seems very costly to re-calculate everything due to one affected area
To simulate cloth's physical features, I think it is unavoidable to recalculate everything in time steps, otherwise, it might be hard to cheat human eyes.
I wonder if the predictable nature of modeling something like a cloth is noticeable after a lot of repeated iterations.
I wonder if/how numerical precision effects deterministic simulation
The mass spring mesh reminds me of the Bézier curves that we studied earlier. After a quick search, I found that it turns out we can make meshes using Bézier curves.
I'm curious to see how different interpolation schemes between the anchors affects the visuals provided by moving the mesh around. I suspect that it's not too much.
Adding on to discussion about Bezier curves relative to the mass-spring mesh - integrating Bezier curves into mass-spring meshes could potentially streamline the visualization of the mesh by smoothing the representation of dynamic elements. However, the core simulation fidelity hinges on accurately calculating forces, which means the computational savings might primarily benefit the visual layer rather than the simulation's physics calculations.
I’m very interested in seeing implementations of this
@AlsonC After HW4 and messing with the renders for fun, the calculated nature of a simulation does begin to tarnish the cheat played on the human eye. It becomes easier with each simulation to "anticipate" the fabric, its bounces, how it bounces and folds, etc. and it does make things look a little uncanny with the right settings (like the stiffer the fabric, the harder it is to trick my eye that this is fabric)