Stereoscopic Viewing and Reported Perceived Immersion and Symptoms

Yang, Shun-nan; Schlieski, Tawny; Selmins, Brent; Cooper, Scott; Doherty, Rina; Corriveau, Philip; Sheedy, James E.

doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e31825da430

Cited by 81 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we did not find evidence supporting the results from earlier studies that viewing 3D causes more VIMS compared to viewing 2D [2,[24][25][26][27]. Both the SSQ total scores and MISC rates failed to increase substantially more in the 3D session than scores obtained in the 2D session.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Confirming previous reports, this study showed that exposure to 2D and 3D motion stimuli can elicit VIMS symptoms [2,4,12,25,26,34,35], as assessed using the SSQ (for both 2D and 3D). However, we did not find evidence supporting the results from earlier studies that viewing 3D causes more VIMS compared to viewing 2D [2,[24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Moreover, the observed increase in disorienting symptoms, which are only part of the symptom set of VIMS, provides evidence in favor of VIMS over visual discomfort. Finally, the results on the SSQ are in line with the only two other studies that investigated VIMS in relation to viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli on a TV screen [25,26]. However, the severity of VIMS was very low compared to that observed in studies using (large) projection screens, as used in movie theaters [10,12,23,24].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Several earlier studies have investigated the effect of viewing stereoscopic 3D stimuli, compared to viewing 2D stimuli. In these studies participants were exposed to computer generated stimuli or a movie, that was shown in 2D and 3D on either a projection screen, at the cinema or on a TV-screen [2,[24][25][26][27]. Despite the large differences in stimuli and displaying techniques, in all studies participants experienced significantly more severe VIMS symptoms after viewing 3D motion stimuli compared to 2D motion stimuli [2,[24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Equally moved and not really sick from viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli on a TV screen

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjective: Visually induced motion sickness (VIMS) and increased postural sway are two adverse side effects that may occur when viewing motion stimuli. However, whether these effects are elevated to a greater extent when viewing stereoscopic 3D motion stimuli, compared to 2D stimuli on a TV screen, has not been investigated under controlled circumstances. Therefore this study aimed at investigating VIMS and postural sway before, during, and directly after viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli, on a commonly available TV screen. Method: 16 Participants were exposed to an aviation documentary shown in 2D and in 3D on separate occasions. Before, during, and after exposure, VIMS and postural sway were measured. VIMS was quantified by a rating scale giving a single number, and by a multi-symptom questionnaire that assessed multiple VIMS symptoms separately. Sway path length, standard deviations and short-range and longrange scaling components of the center of pressure were calculated as measures of postural sway. Results: VIMS symptom severity, as obtained with the single rating scale, did not show a significant increase to either 2D or 3D exposure. The multi-symptom questionnaire did reveal significant increases in VIMS symptom severity to both 2D and 3D exposure. However, VIMS was not significantly more increased in case of 3D exposure compared to 2D exposure. All postural sway measures (sway path length, standard deviation in mediolateral and anteroposterior direction, as well as the short-range scaling components) increased significantly as a result of exposure. None of the postural sway measures was differentially affected to 3D as compared to 2D exposure. Conclusion: Viewing 3D motion stimuli did not cause more serious VIMS symptoms, compared to viewing motion stimuli in 2D. We attribute this lack of difference to the fact that the 3D effects in this documentary were optimized for viewing in a cinema, the projection on the TV-screen thus causing quarantining of the visual input. The increase in postural sway, irrespective of image type, may reflect exploratory behavior, allowing the participant to gain more information about self-orientation with respect to the virtual environment.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Equally moved and not really sick from viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli on a TV screen

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A substantial amount of research supports the idea that mitigating the vergence-accommodation conflict in stereoscopic displays improves both perception and comfort, and this observation has been a major motivation for the development of displays that support multiple focus distances (3,5,7,(12)(13)(14)(15)27). However, the fact that accommodative gain universally deteriorates with age suggests that the effects of the vergence-accommodation conflict may differ for people of different ages (28)(29)(30) and even that multifocus or dynamic display modes may be undesirable for older users. Because presbyopes do not accommodate to a wide range of distances, these individuals essentially always have this conflict in their day to day lives.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing virtual reality for all users through gaze-contingent and adaptive focus displays

Padmanaban

Konrad

Stramer

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the desktop to the laptop to the mobile device, personal computing platforms evolve over time. Moving forward, wearable computing is widely expected to be integral to consumer electronics and beyond. The primary interface between a wearable computer and a user is often a near-eye display. However, current generation near-eye displays suffer from multiple limitations: they are unable to provide fully natural visual cues and comfortable viewing experiences for all users. At their core, many of the issues with near-eye displays are caused by limitations in conventional optics. Current displays cannot reproduce the changes in focus that accompany natural vision, and they cannot support users with uncorrected refractive errors. With two prototype neareye displays, we show how these issues can be overcome using display modes that adapt to the user via computational optics. By using focus-tunable lenses, mechanically actuated displays, and mobile gaze-tracking technology, these displays can be tailored to correct common refractive errors and provide natural focus cues by dynamically updating the system based on where a user looks in a virtual scene. Indeed, the opportunities afforded by recent advances in computational optics open up the possibility of creating a computing platform in which some users may experience better quality vision in the virtual world than in the real one.virtual reality | augmented reality | 3D vision | vision correction | computational optics E merging virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) systems have applications that span entertainment, education, communication, training, behavioral therapy, and basic vision research. In these systems, a user primarily interacts with the virtual environment through a near-eye display. Since the invention of the stereoscope almost 180 years ago (1), significant developments have been made in display electronics and computer graphics (2), but the optical design of stereoscopic near-eye displays remains almost unchanged from the Victorian age. In front of each eye, a small physical display is placed behind a magnifying lens, creating a virtual image at some fixed distance from the viewer (Fig. 1A). Small differences in the images displayed to the two eyes can create a vivid perception of depth, called stereopsis.However, this simple optical design lacks a critical aspect of 3D vision in the natural environment: changes in stereoscopic depth are also associated with changes in focus. When viewing a near-eye display, users' eyes change their vergence angle to fixate objects at a range of stereoscopic depths, but to focus on the virtual image, the crystalline lenses of the eyes must accommodate to a single fixed distance ( Fig. 2A). For users with normal vision, this asymmetry creates an unnatural condition known as the vergence-accommodation conflict (3, 4). Symptoms associated with this conflict include double vision (diplopia), compromised visual clarity, visual discomfort, and fatigue (3, 5). Moreover, a lack of accurate focus also removes a cu...

show abstract

Effects of contrast and ambient illumination on visual discomfort of autostereoscopic display

Wang,

Zhao,

Zhang

2023

J Soc Info Display

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conflict between vergence and accommodation is the main perceptual factors contributing to visual discomfort when viewing autostereoscopic display. The key factors relevant to the accommodation and vergence are the ambient illumination and the contrast. The current study was a 2 × 3 × 3 mixed design comparing VFSI and VIMS symptoms between 2D and 3D video clips with three contrast levels under three ambient illumination levels on the autostereoscopic display. Twenty participants were required to evaluate the degree of discomfort by filing out questionnaires after watching those video clips. According to the result analysis, the 3D viewing participants reported more severe symptoms compared to 2D. The moderate contrast conditions were found to be the optimum for viewing comfort. The difference between VFSI and VIMS symptoms become larger with increasing contrast. The results also suggested the optimum 3D illumination condition should not be too high to effectively relieve visual discomfort. VIMS symptoms were more sensitive to the changes in ambient illumination than VFSI. Moreover, significant interaction between contrast and ambient illumination was found. Participants felt the most comfortable in the combination effect of moderate level of contrast and the high level of ambient illumination.

show abstract

Stereoscopic Viewing and Reported Perceived Immersion and Symptoms

Cited by 81 publications

References 25 publications

Equally moved and not really sick from viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli on a TV screen

Equally moved and not really sick from viewing 2D and 3D motion stimuli on a TV screen

Optimizing virtual reality for all users through gaze-contingent and adaptive focus displays

Effects of contrast and ambient illumination on visual discomfort of autostereoscopic display

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About