CS838 Computer Animation - Paper Review Form

Paper Title:	Fast and Intuitive Generation of Geometric Shape Transitions - 
			Malte Zöckler, Detleve Stalling, and Hans-Christian Hege
Place Published:	The Visual Computer, 16 (2000) 5, pp. 241-253
Reviewer:		Martin Hulth

1. Summarize the paper:

This paper describes a morphing technique applied to triangulated geometric 
models of arbitrary topologies (yet similar global topologies ??) which achieves 
a fast and smooth transition with "realistic" in-between shapes. The 
correspondences are determined by user-defined patches where arbitrary feature 
points may also be specified. The patches are then globally parameterized, 
making sure to preserve continuity across patches. The additional feature points 
then warp the shapes within the space accordingly. Interpolation is finally used 
once the original meshes are merged within the parameterized space (a 
"supergrid") and the corresponding points of each mesh are computed for each 
vertex of the "supergrid".

1a. Summarize the paper's contribution to computer graphics: (for a
historical paper, comment on the effect this paper had on later work)

This paper is very complete. It can handle several types of morphing and since 
it allows lots of user interaction, it seems to be quite versatile. Thus, I feel 
this paper is an important addition to the field of 3-D geometric morphing.

2. Comment on the paper's exposition - how could the author have made
this paper easier to understand?

One thing the authors could have spent more time on was their extension of their 
method to morph between topologically distinct objects. It might not be to much 
additional work, but just placing rips in objects doesn't necessarily describe 
the new connectivity of the objects and how they retain continuity over patches.

2a. Could this work be reproduced given the paper and the references?
What would the scope of the project be? (e.g. huge development effort,
PhD thesis, undergraduate course project, weekend hack, ...)

A semester-long project for a Graduate student. 

3. Are the references adequate for the time when this was published?
Are there papers that have come out since that the author could have
used had they been around at the time?

Yes, I definitely think the references are thorough and complete.

3a. Describe some of the follow on papers. (don't just list papers
that cite this one, but things which are direct improvements)

The only work I found was related to some of the authors' work done in IEEE 
Visualization, and those papers which sited these articles I was unable to track 
down. I feel this paper was complete enough that any further work most likely 
focused on more local control while generating the correspondences, if anything.

3b. Often, papers are submitted with videos demonstrating the
work. The paper is supposed to stand without the video. What video
demonstration would you have liked to have seen to better appreciate
the paper?

I found the videos which accompany this paper (the URL is included in the text). 
The video which I found most helpful was one which included different coloring 
of patches along with a first, unsuccessful attempt at establishing the proper 
correspondences and then a second, successful morph with altered 
correspondences.

4. What recommendation would you have given this paper for
publication in its venue?
	1 = Reject
	2 = Doubtful
	3 = Possibly Accept
	4 = Probably
	5 = Definitely

5->Definitely

What recommendation would you give this paper for inclusion in a
Computer Animation reading list?
	1 = Reject (don't bother)
	2 = Doubtful
	3 = Possibly Accept
	4 = Probably
	5 = Definitely (this is seminal, everyone should read it)

4-5 -> Very interesting and complete, a good read (with video)!

5. Explain your recommendation?

Read above…