Transcript
Page 1: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

24 June 2013 Alexander Schulze [email protected]

Evaluation of Gesture Interfaces

Page 2: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces
Page 3: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces
Page 4: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces
Page 5: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces
Page 6: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

hand gesture

Page 7: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

depth image sequence

Page 8: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

hand 1: U movehand 2: show 5

position tracking

hand gesture

depth image sequence

gesture description

gesture recognition

Page 9: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Experiment: Gestures based interfaces Which gestures are suitable to control a computer?

Conclusion for gesture interfaces Do gestures in"uence future interactions?

Agenda

Range-imaging technologies How can a depth map be computed?

Page 10: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Range-imaging technologies

Page 11: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Range-imaging for gesture interfaces §  What are suitable devices for gesture interfaces

to be widely used?

Page 12: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

a#ordable

Range-imaging for gesture interfaces §  What are suitable devices for gesture interfaces

to be widely used?

Page 13: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

a#ordable compact

Range-imaging for gesture interfaces §  What are suitable devices for gesture interfaces

to be widely used?

Page 14: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

a#ordable compact mobile

Range-imaging for gesture interfaces §  What are suitable devices for gesture interfaces

to be widely used?

Page 15: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

a#ordable compact mobile markerless

Range-imaging for gesture interfaces §  What are suitable devices for gesture interfaces

to be widely used?

Page 16: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Range-imaging technologies

Structured light Time of "ight Amplitude modulation

Page 17: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Range-imaging technologies

Structured light Time of "ight Amplitude modulation

Page 18: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Range-imaging technologies

Structured light Time of "ight Amplitude modulation

Page 19: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Triangulation Geometric distance computation

Page 20: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Structured Light Parallel light sources

Page 21: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Time of "ight Light distance di#erences

Page 22: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Amplitude modulation Sending light waves coherent light source signal amplitude modulated light

Page 23: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Comparison Suitable depth cameras Range Accuracy Image resolution

Structured light

Time of "ight

Amplitude modulation <

<

<

Structured light

Time of "ight

Amplitude modulation

Time of "ight

Amplitude modulation

Structured light

Page 24: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Comparison Suitable depth cameras §  Depth resolution and range

§  Update rate and latency

§  Robustness

§  Spatial resolution of depth image

Page 25: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

0.01mm

Page 26: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Experiment: Gesture based interfaces

Page 27: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Semiotic gestures Navigation

ZoomingRotation

Page 28: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Selecting Dragging

Dropping Flipping

Pseudo-ergotic gestures Manipulation

Page 29: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Results Times for traditional and gesture input

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Mouse Gesture

time [min]

Page 30: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Results Further results from questionnaires §  Gesture input is more fun, but less e$cient and

accurate

§  Correlation between participants who never played

physical LEGO and long construction times for gesture interface

§  Semiotic gestures are easy to use

§  Most participants prefer a combination of gesture input

together with traditional input

Page 31: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Conclusion for gesture interfaces

Page 32: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Navigation Accuracy and precision §  Imprecise actions can be controlled by gestures

§  Gestures might support creativity

Page 33: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Manipulation Accuracy and precision §  Gesture input cannot replace precise mouse and

keyboard input

Page 34: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Conclusion Gesture Interpretation §  Most current gesture interfaces are built for controlling

the computer; however, gestures are a subconscious expression of human feelings

§  Experience of haptic feedback in ergotic physical

gestures is helpful for simulating the haptic feedback in related pseudo-ergotic gestures

Page 35: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

Questions?

Page 36: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

http://www.vriendinnen.be/user%les/images/maatschappij/

2011/april2011/interactiefwinkelraam.jpg

http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/

8/86760/1804618-image_kinect_fun_lab_15890_2316_0007.jpg

https://www.leapmotion.com/media/leap_motion_media.zip

http://media.salon.com/2013/01/gadget-show-

intel.jpeg1-1280x960.jpg

Photos

Page 37: Evaluation of 3d gesture interfaces

http://www.misure.unisa.it/uploads/2814/scanner_struct.jpg

http://miac.unibas.ch/PMI/04-BasicsOfUltrasound-media/%gs/

time-of-"ight.png

https://www.leapmotion.com/media/leap_motion_media.zip

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/

06/11/1129_makingof_lego/image/intro.jpg

Photos


Top Related