Showing anatomy

[Mbaarda]

Another idea/feature is showing the anatomy with the internal actions.

For example:

When you insert the gastric feeding tube throug the nose. You should be able to see the gullet/esophagus. With the tube going all the way through down to the stomach.

The same can be done with the injection scenes. Like this:

I dont know if its possible to adjust the alpha of the Client. And showing the organs/muscles that are being used for this specific protocol. It can also be a animated video that we show before inserting the needle or gastric feeding tube.

Again, please post your estimate and ideas down below in the comments.

[PeterHarmatiy]

I agree with Vitalii (his post in skype) that if we need an X-Ray effect, it's better to do it as a separate video via pop-up. Because existing patients as they are now are not capable to do an X-Ray effect on different parts of body at all (+ Unity doesn't work well with transparency).

Here I made a small cinematic video of injection with X-Ray. https://youtu.be/m7RY4oTlC0s I think we may use such small cinematic videos to clarify or add extra explanation to the sequence by adding text or some pointer on video.

Creating that video took 10 hours of work ( Adjusting animation, set materials and objects, create muscles, render time). During work, I noticed that hands are taking too many space of screen which doesn't let the camera to capture from different angles. Also, I noticed that the model of a guy in the injection scene isn't anatomically correct ( the hands are too long, so the muscles won't be correct as well). So to solve these problems I will try to record another video without player's hands and a patient. There will be only syringe and patient's hand, let's see how it will look.

Generally, I can say that this way is possible, but it is a bit time-expensive. Creating a correct natural anatomy will take some time (in case of more complex protocols). Also adding any small changes to animation will require to render video again, and it takes nearly 5 hours (if we're talking about video with duration of 16 seconds, 960x540, 60 fps). On the other side we can do some adjustments in render settings and get a better result ( for example I think we don't need 60 fps because our game is running on 30 fps). Anyway I need to do more tests.

I know that Vitalii is working on different way of visualization, so let's wait his option.

[Acvarium]

Simplistic infographic style of video. Easy and quick to create than full 3d animations. Quick to render. And look more informative

https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/463177/137480107-ee82bb1f-2aeb-4a87-b2c5-933445114c5b.mp4

[GijsTempel]

Hi guys, I do think the animation video of @PeterHarmatiy is way better and looks nicer than the infographic.

I do agree tho dat the sort of flat info graphic is easier and quicker to make. It would also be easier to implement more information in those video's.

I think we should start with the infographic kind to show important internal stuff like katherisation and injection. I will discuss it with Jos aswell on monday what he thinks. If he wants the way @PeterHarmatiy created it that we should do that:) I will let you know

[PeterHarmatiy]

Here is another video: https://youtu.be/ZL9t3X74r-k Here the render time took 1 hour ( 35 sec, 1920x1080, 25 fps) but creating a correct anatomy took too much time. Generally, there is no big difference in what we see in Vitalii's video and my. The major difference is the time which was used for creation + Vitalii's video is easier to customize if needed.

Totally agree that 3D approach will take more time than infographic and 3D approach is less flexible in this case.