Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!crd.ge.com
From: meltsner@crd.ge.com (Kenneth J Meltsner)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.visualization
Subject: Re: Out of the lab, into the classroom
Keywords: reuse fabulous
Message-ID: <18226@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Date: 4 Apr 91 15:30:57 GMT
References: <1991Apr2.202227.13796@agate.berkeley.edu> <1991Apr3.172156.3960@nas.nasa.gov> <1991Apr3.193914.4569@agate.berkeley.edu> <1991Apr3.215031.7763@nas.nasa.gov> <1151@durer.cme.nist.gov>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Reply-To: meltsner@crd.ge.com
Organization: GE Research and Development Center
Lines: 64

In article <1151@durer.cme.nist.gov>, bagwill@swe.ncsl.nist.gov (Bob
Bagwill) writes:

[... stuff deleted ...]

|>On the one hand, the synthetic effort necessary to pre-visualize the data
|>might lead to new insights.
|>
|>On the other hand, scientists may ignore useful data because it doesn't make
|>a pretty picture.  Speaking from zero knowledge, I would guess that
|>grant committees and other investors like pretty pictures.  Scene from
|>NSF committee of the future :-)
|>
|>    And opening our fabulous Spring Visualization line-up is
|>    Gizmo Gearloose of PolyTech with his `Visualization of the
|>    Distribution of Atypical Incisor Formation in Lower
|>    Mammals'.  Rendered with the exciting XIPAR multi-
|>    dimenionsal shader, his creation uses a daring palette of
|>    hot pinks and blues on a black background.  Way to go, Gizmo!


Oh, we already do this -- look at some of the papers from the IEEE
Visualization '90.  At another conference, a computer graphics person
made the distinction between useful graphics and management graphics,
and the amount of time needed to generate them.  Management graphics
might take an order of magnitude more time to make, and provide an
order of magnitude less information.

My big problem with the concept of visualization as a discipline is
that it sounds surprisingly similar to the basic mistake made by the
expert system shell folks.  They would say things like, "We've done
all the hard work for you.  Now all you have to do is put in your own
knowledge."  It turns out that gathering and assessing the knowledge
*is* the hard part -- the shell construction is straightforward
computer programming.  Knowledge acquisition, organization, and
application are the tough jobs.

The same is true of the visualization types: "We've done the hard
part: here's a renderer, some data display tools, etc.  Now go and do
good science with your data."  I'm not sure they realize the hard part
is just beginning, and that the tools they've given the scientists
don't help a lot.  Visualization can help reduce the information
overload, but it doesn't help with the insight or analysis to make the
conceptual leap from the video to understanding the real world.

Jock Mackinlay had a really cool paper in Transactions on Graphics
detailing his expert system to automatically construct graphs from
data, graphs that would automatically display the correct variables in
a pleasing and informative way.  Too bad nobody has any programs to do
that sort of thing on the market.

Visualization people will only be useful when they understand that
they are actually one of the least important parts of the whole
process.  Critical, yes, but not the part that actually contributes to
the scientific world or towards a solution of an engineering problem.


--
===============================================================================
Ken Meltsner                        | meltsner@crd.ge.com (518) 387-6391
GE Research and Development Center  | Fax:  (518) 387-7495
P.O. Box 8, Room K1/MB207	    | Nothing I say should be attributed
Schenectady, NY 12301               | to my employer, and probably vice-versa
=================Dep't of Materials Science, ACME Looniversity=================