Tangible Interaction Menu for AR Environments
TIM
Sophie Erbsner and Julian Peter Augsburg University of Applied Sciences Interaction Engineering | WS 2017/18
TIM Tangible Interaction Menu for AR Environments THE PROBLEM In - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Sophie Erbsner and Julian Peter Augsburg University of Applied Sciences Interaction Engineering | WS 2017/18 TIM Tangible Interaction Menu for AR Environments THE PROBLEM In everyday life Covering display and objects with hands and fjngers
Tangible Interaction Menu for AR Environments
Sophie Erbsner and Julian Peter Augsburg University of Applied Sciences Interaction Engineering | WS 2017/18
THE PROBLEM In everyday life
Covering display and objects with hands and fjngers Fatigue due to touch gestures
RELATED WORK
“CAMERA-BASED INTERACTIONS FOR AUGMENTED REALITY”
By: Tatu Harviainen, Otto Korkalo, Charles Woodward (VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland)Easy-to-use, marker-based tracking, Interacting with AR content by gesturing with camera on mobile device
CORE IDEA AR connection to reality
Augmented Reality as mix
A tangible object (reality) manipulates AR content (virtuality)
PAPER PROTOTYPE One tool for one hand
Evolutionary process: From a cube to an octahedron Using the object in a single hand: Holding between thump + index fjnger, Rotating with another fjnger.
THE INTERACTIONS Menu Items
In total: 8 menu items for each side Implemented: 6 menu items Rotate Scale Move Colour • • • •
THE INTERACTIONS Menu Items Colour • • • • Scale Move Rotate
SHAPES AND GRAPHICS Design and functionality
Creating functional trackers: From a simple icon to a marker with more trackable points
TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION Coding
Touch: LeanTouch, Vuforia Plugin for Unity 3D Rotate, pinch and drag gestures
Live Demo First Prototype
TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION Coding
TIM: Unity und Vuforia Hold virtual buttons to start interaction
Live Demo Second Prototype
USER TEST Two scenarios
User Test: Participants passed 8 functional tasks with different numbers of interaction Questionnaire: Which method is faster, more precise, easier to use and more enjoyable?
USER TEST Comparison
MEAN SPEED related to NUMBER OF INTERACTIONS Problems with TIM: tracking markers
Move Rotate Speed in Sec. Scale 0.4 Mean value (1. Bar) compared with fastest value (2. Bar)Scale: –2 | -1 | 0 | +1 | +2 From STRONGLY DISAGREE to STRONGLY AGREE Touch Tangible Interaction Menu
QUESTIONNAIRE Proof of concept
QUESTIONNAIRE Proof of concept
Important questions for further research: Would people use it? 1.75 More fun with TIM than with Touch: 1.375
RECOGNITION Lessons learned
People had fun with the TIM System, but the tests need a lot of time due to some technical diffjculties: Implementing menu items: Field of Depth, instabil Vuforia AR Camera Virtual Buttons More intuitive interaction for Rotate
CONCLUSION Future work
Improvings of TIM: Interacting as Proxy Using HoloLens
CONCLUSION Further Usage
Designing and planning landscapes (for cities) Interaction with more than 2 people Solution for Problem: Faster and easier than building miniatures
for your attention!