We’ve discussed the impressive capabilities and uses of Forensic Animation in a few previous articles, but a new post up on EzineMark discussed the double-edged sword of some of the higher-end graphics. As television shows like CSI and Bones keep pushing the envelope with high-end high-budget CG effects and videos, real animators find themselves struggling to keep up with juror expectations.
Thanks to the wide spread use of 3D animated computer graphics in television, film, video gaming, etc. jurors today will likely have expectations of a higher degree of realism. Crudely created animations will not be appealing or credible to an audience of jurors today. Poorly rendered animations by inexperienced animators have given this visual tool a bad reputation in some instances.
Then again, if a movie looks “too good” people will think it’s completely a conceptual piece meant to warp their view of the facts.
Because of our movie going experience with special effects, there is a pre-conceived notion that 3D animations are largely products of the animator’s imagination. However, trained forensic animators spends as much as 70% of their project hours on tracking down and verifying the data they are using to re-create the scene. At each and every phase, from building the models and objects to the planned movement of those objects, and the environment they are shown in, every detail must relate and correspond directly with the investigative facts, eyewitness reports, photographs, and expert testimony.
