Room2Room

Pejša, Tomislav; Kantor, J; Benko, Hrvoje; Ofek, Eyal; Wilson, Andrew

doi:10.1145/2818048.2819965

Cited by 174 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the scale and complexity of physical tasks changes how people communicate and the value of specific forms of telepresence (e.g., robotic telepresence (Rae et al, 2014), augmented reality (e.g., room size projections (Pejsa et al, 2016)). As I found in my pilot studies, object complexity affects the amount of detail and nuance in critique-increasingly complex objects may affect the strategies presenters use to communicate longer critique that is more elaborate.…”

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critiquing Physical Prototypes for a Remote Audience

Mok

Oehlberg

2017

Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I present an observational study of physical prototype critique that highlights some of the challenges of communicating physical behaviors and materiality at a distance.Geographically distributed open hardware communities often conduct user feedback and peer critique sessions via video conference. However, people have difficulty using current video conferencing tools to demonstrate and critique physical designs. To examine the challenges of remote critique, I conducted an observational lab study in which participants critiqued pairs of physical prototypes (prosthetic hands) for a face-toface or remote collaborator. In both conditions, participants' material experiences were an important part of their critique, however their attention was divided between interacting with the prototype and finding strategies to communicate 'invisible' features.Based on my findings, I propose design implications for remote collaboration tools that support the sharing of material experiences and prototype critique.iii Publications Some figures and material in this thesis has previously appeared in prior work:Mok, T., Oehlberg, L. (2017) Critiquing physical prototypes for a remote audience.

show abstract

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critiquing Physical Prototypes for a Remote Audience

Mok

Oehlberg

2017

Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research indicates that in many instances talking to a passenger is much less distracting than talking on the phone (Charlton 2009). For example, an AR device could render a remote conversant as a life-like hologram sitting in the passenger seat (similarly to (Pejsa et al 2016)). Alternatively, the AR device could project an avatar in the passenger seat.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Calling While Driving: An Initial Experiment with HoloLens

Kun

Meulen

Janssen

2017

Proceedings of the 9th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design: Dri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:We investigate the visual distraction of drivers when they use an augmented reality (AR) device (HoloLens) for video calling while driving. The work is motivated by the advent of novel AR technology and by research on context sharing between callers. Both suggest that AR might soon be appropriated for 2-way video calling in cars, yet little is known on how distracting this is to the driver. Our participants drove in a simulator while engaged in a Skype conversation. We compared a condition with a video presentation (through AR), and a speech-only condition. We found that participants hardly looked at the video, perhaps because it was not visible from peripheral vision without making a head movement. In this way, HoloLens was less distracting visually than a monitor display used in earlier work. Although less distraction is desirable, using HoloLens also has a drawback: when drivers did look at the video they had to turn their head away from the road to look to the right, and down. The work makes suggestions on how to further study the safety and other issues of this new technology.

show abstract

“…They also point out that the optical characteristics of the material maintain polarisation and so could support passive stereoscopy. Room2room from Microsoft labs (Benko, 2016) demonstrates the utility of projecting onto furniture. The system uses a Kinect 2.5D camera to capture a remote participant, and an overhead projector combined with a Kinect to projection map a viewpoint correct image of the tele-present person onto a complex surface such as a chair.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Telethrone Reconstructed; Ongoing Testing Toward a More Natural Situated Display

O'Hare

Fairchild

Wolff

et al. 2017

Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of supporting ad-hoc or dynamic membership tele-present meetings through pulling up a chair is novel. In real world business situations, people pull up a chair after catching the eye of someone already seated. Telethrone is a situated display on a chair which allows multiple correct views of a remote collaborator. The system has been expanded to support informal meetings where chairs can be moved around. This is facilitated through the novel integration of a 3D reconstructed model of a person, with live viewpoint dependent rendering onto a retro-reflective surface. This removes the need for painstaking alignment of multiple cameras and projectors each time a chair is moved. A between subjects experiment tested accuracy of reconnected mutual gaze mediated by part of the system. Subjectively easier and harder situations are compared. Specifically best and worst cases, both in terms of orientation of eyes in the reconstructed head, and angle of observer gaze onto the display. Discussion compares results to experiments that used other systems to attempt to convey eye gaze by different techniques. This research builds toward a scalable system for adhoc business meetings; a paradigm poorly supported by current video conferencing. It is also applicable to supporting conversations between seated people in any scenario where seats might be moved, for example in interaction between client and therapist in tele-therapy.

show abstract

Room2Room

Cited by 174 publications

References 25 publications

Critiquing Physical Prototypes for a Remote Audience

Critiquing Physical Prototypes for a Remote Audience

Calling While Driving: An Initial Experiment with HoloLens

Telethrone Reconstructed; Ongoing Testing Toward a More Natural Situated Display

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About