Next: Volume Morphing
Up: Introduction
Previous: Image Morphing versus
The models subjected to 3D morphing can be described either by
geometric primitives or by volumes (volumetric data sets). Each
representation requires different morphing algorithms. This
dichotomy parallels the separation of 2D morphing techniques into
those that operate on raster images [21]
[2] [6], and those that assume
vector-based image representations [16]. We believe
that volume-based descriptions are more appropriate for 3D morphing
for the following reasons:
- The quality and applicability of geometric 3D morphing
techniques [12] is highly dependent on the models'
geometric primitives and their topological properties. Volume morphing
is independent of object geometries and topologies, and thus imposes
no such restrictions on the objects which can be successfully morphed.
- Volume morphing may be applied to objects represented either by
geometric primitives or by volumes. Geometric descriptions can be
easily converted to high-quality volume representations, as we will see
in section 2. The reverse process produces
topologically complex objects, usually inappropriate for geometric
morphing.
Last update: 11 May 1995 by Apostolos "Toli" Lerios[email protected]