Virtual Reality vs Film: What Are the Benefits of Each When Presenting Building Designs?

Subscriber Access

Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed-Reality add to an evolving spectrum of visualization tools that have invigorated the dialogue around how we pre-experience architecture. Los Angeles-based Shimahara Illustration discusses a fundamental difference between these new technologies and traditional CG film/animation.

Much of the fascination with VR/AR/MR lies in the shifting authorship of experience. The audience is now in control of the Mise-en-scène which yields a categorically different experience than when viewing a film. The reason is simple: with VR you have a user; with film you have an auteur.

The distinction comes down to the question: who is responsible for producing the narrative? Within virtual reality the user is the one creating the story, albeit as a kind of meandering by-product of exploration. The VR experience might be thought of more as a process of discovery than of actual story-making in a linear sense. In any case, it is in sharp contrast with the cinematic choreography offered by the filmmaker’s work. With a film or animation scenes are composed, sequenced, and timed to music with the collective intention of leading an audience towards a specific message.

Content Loader
About this author
Cite: Sponsored Post. "Virtual Reality vs Film: What Are the Benefits of Each When Presenting Building Designs?" 05 Sep 2016. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/794704/virtual-reality-vs-film-what-are-the-benefits-of-each-when-presenting-building-designs> ISSN 0719-8884

Courtesy of Shimahara Illustration

虚拟现实VS 影片种表达手法孰优孰劣?

You've started following your first account!

Did you know?

You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.