by Mike Gleicher on April 12, 2013
I am totally aware that I have been bad at giving you feedback. Which puts me in a vicious cycle: the longer I delay, the more I feel like I need to deliver, which causes me to delay longer.
I apologize. My excuses are lame.
I have decided I am not going to ask you to do any new things (e.g. readings) until I get this fixed. (All the project deadlines stand).
I have this big messy spreadsheet with all the data. What I think I’m going to do is write some scripts that extract the appropriate columns and get this back to you this weekend.
Some things on what to expect:
- In-class – totally subjective.
- I’ve ranked people as "3=Contributor, 2=Partial-Contributor, 1=Non-0=Contributor, and Worse”. Since this is subjective, I acknowledge that its +/- 1 level. Normally, contributor is the level of expectation for a grad class (I didn’t bother distinguishing “valued contributor”, but am aware that there are some of those).
- I kindof factor in if you appear to be missing more than I’d expect. Again, this is subjective. So if you’re not contributing, I may not even be aware that you’re there when you are. (see the course policies)
- I had mentioned that for people uncomfortable contributing in class, contributing on-line was an option. However, there seems to be a correlation: good online contributors are generally good in-class contributors. Also, no one has done significantly more than the required postings, so this is a non-factor this semester.
- Postings (for the first 16 readings, and assignments). As I mentioned in a post, I keep track “notable, acceptable, minimal, none”. Generally, the only thing that matters is that on avergae they are better than minimal. If you’re consistently better (or worse) than acceptable, that might count for something. But to be honest, there are clear dividing lines, and no real boundary cases.
- For the first 4 assignments, there really isn’t that much difference. Everyone pretty much did it.
- For Project 1 (Assignments 4&5), I have lots of raw data, but no real decisions yet. I will get that back to everyone as well. There are things like “how complete was your peer review” in addition to my assessment of the projects. Ironically, the latter thing is where its really subjective, and I am thinking of giving people the benefit of doubt on things.
In terms of how the project 1 grades work:
After collecting all the data, I had 4 summary things: did you do the personal parts (all the expected writeups and reviews) (graded acc, or not); an “A5” grade; a documentation grade (considers all documents – note: having any video was better than having no video); and an A6 grade. These are on a scale of “Bad, OK, Good” (with some plusses and minuses given). Then I tried to pick a grade. Often I couldn’t, so I picked two (and I’ll decide which one when final grading time comes).
If all goes according to plan, I will figure out a way to convert from my spreadsheet to email and you’ll get some email soon.
by Mike Gleicher on April 9, 2013
For Wednesday 4/10 – Subdivision reading (with Moodle Post)
For Thursday 4/11 – First phase, project plan (get it to me so I am ready for Friday)
For Friday 4/12 – Project planning meeting (we will schedule them in class Wednesday). Project plans due after the meeting (it’s OK as long as I get them before Monday).
by Mike Gleicher on April 5, 2013
This week, the final project will kick into gear, and we’ll talk about some geometry.
Monday April 8th – You should do the reading on physics. You should have made comments / discussion on various project ideas, so you have a good idea of what you want to do. In class, we’ll discuss project ideas, put together teams, and wrap up our (brief) conversation about physics.
Wednesday, April 10th – We’ll talk about Subdivision Surfaces. There is a reading, complete with required Moodle discussion.
Friday, April 12th – NO LECTURE. I will meet with groups to discuss their projects. You will have some preparing to do before those meetings. Details to be provided soon.
by Mike Gleicher on April 3, 2013
Remember that your project 1 stuff (peer reviews, partner review) is due on April 3!
The coarse notes on Projects are here (final project parameters page = fppp)
For April 5, you need to make a Project Idea Posting. There is info on the fppp. Please post (a thread starting topic) to the moodle discussion by 9am Friday.
For this weekend, I’ll send out a reading about basic physics (so you can see it in a less bungled manner).
by Mike Gleicher on April 1, 2013
Coming off break and Project 1, it’s time for… Project 2!
But first there are some loose ends to tie up.
- Monday, April 1: You should do your peer reviews! (They are due by Wednesday). No lecture, so you have time to find people and give/receive demos.
- Wednesday, April 3: In lecture, we’ll talk about Project 2. There is a reading assignment due about special effects in the film industry. All the project 1 handins are due. I will schedule times to meet with each group after I have looked at your handin materials.
- Friday, April 5: I’m not sure what we’ll do in lecture. However, before lecture, you need to make a posting about your ideas for a project 2 project. More instructions in class on Wednesday.
Looking ahead…
The following week, we’ll nail down the final project plans and talk about some aspects of shape modeling (probably subdivision surfaces – but we might skip to cage-based skinning).
by Mike Gleicher on March 21, 2013
For assignment 6 (or the whole assignment 5/6 project thing), you will need to turn in:
- Peer reviews of 2 other groups. (this is due after break on Wednesday, April 3)
- Your partner review and your self-evaluation. (describe at the bottom of the peer review page) (again, due after break, on Wednesday April 3)
- A Document. This should be a PDF file describing what you did. (details below). It is due on Friday, March 22nd. You may also include video clips as part of this. Please upload the PDF and movies to the moodle assignment.
Note: I am not asking you to turn in your code (yet). However, I would like you to do something so that I know when you finished. If you trust the time stamps on your computer, fine. Alternatively: make a ZIP file with a snapshot of your system. Send me the MD5 hash of this file (so I can make sure its the same one). We’ll look at things more closely after break. You’ll give both the peer review demos, as well as another demo to me.
As far as your document: it should explain…
- The general info about your system (be sure to give credit to any libraries you used, etc)
- All of the basic (assignment 5 checklist) features. Give details like what kind of internal representations you use (e.g. quaternions), what motions your parser reads, …
- A description of what you were trying to do for Assignment 6
- A description of what it actually does and how it does it
- A discussion of how well it does it
- References (what did you read to do the project)
Pictures are good.
As far as the due date: this is due Friday, March 22nd. Friday means not Saturday.