So CG only involves turning digital info into sensory, but not the other way around (turning/encoding/scanning what we see into digital information for simulation/demonstration purposes)?
gloose
Isn't this somewhat stretching the definition for one field? I would think "graphics" by definition refers to visual stimuli, and, for example, auditory stimuli deserves its own field called "computer audio" or something similar. Are there similarities between computer representations of these different types of stimuli that make it sensible to group them into one field?
air-wreck
It feels like when people talk about graphics, they primarily mean visual stimuli, potentially augmented by other types of sensory stimuli. Is there any work on strictly non-visual graphics, e.g. for accessibility reasons?
So CG only involves turning digital info into sensory, but not the other way around (turning/encoding/scanning what we see into digital information for simulation/demonstration purposes)?
Isn't this somewhat stretching the definition for one field? I would think "graphics" by definition refers to visual stimuli, and, for example, auditory stimuli deserves its own field called "computer audio" or something similar. Are there similarities between computer representations of these different types of stimuli that make it sensible to group them into one field?
It feels like when people talk about graphics, they primarily mean visual stimuli, potentially augmented by other types of sensory stimuli. Is there any work on strictly non-visual graphics, e.g. for accessibility reasons?