3. See also Giambattista della Porta, 1584
Augmented Reality: the early times at the theatre
4. See also Giambattista della Porta, 1584
Augmented Reality: the early times at the theatre
«combiner»
Phantom
(the augmentation)
audience
Augmented
scene
stage
Real scene
6. 6
Augmented Reality: enabling devices
several types
SEE-THROUGH HMDs
• Optical see-through
• Video see-through
HAND-HELD
DISPLAYS
PROJECTION
(spatial AR)
Light-field
displays (“new”)
digital projector Holographic
7.
8. Augmented Reality: Definition
* R.T. Azuma, A survey of Augmented Reality, Teleoperators andVirtual Environments,
vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 355-385, Aug. 1997.
= not all overimposed virtual content is Augmented Reality !!!
Combines real and virtual images*
(display)
Interactive in Real Time
(interaction)
Registered in 3D
(Tracking)
10. The challenges I
Recurrent issues
from Photonics to HMDs
many interdependent variables
‘fighting one against each other’Hardware development
• Battery
• Contrast
• Form-factor, Ergonomy( weight and
distribution, eyestrain ect)
• occlusion
General tradeoffs
Enterprise level
Risk
Lot of bright companies failed
(such as Microoptical and othe)
Slippery ground, many unknowns
Lot of development before product to market
More are patenting (easier infringment)
consequences
market evolving, important to develop in
a platform-independent approach
Software development
11. 11
HMD
Main Parameters – HW development tradeoffs
•Field of View (FOV)
•Eye Box or Exit Pupil
•Eye Relief
•Image Quality (resolution, MTF)
•Luminance
•Focus
•form-factor/aesthetics/ergonomics
•Energy consumption/batteries
•User Interface
•price
optical
and:
12. Light sources
from Photonics to HMDs
Optical Combiner
Technology
• Waveguided (may have spurious
reflections)
• Free-space lighter, smaller FOV
Optical combiner
architecture
• Refractive- less performant, may be
bulkier, not spectral selective
• Diffractive, Holographic – chromatic
aberration, need of source with thin
spectral line
• Free-form surfaces- expensive,
difficult to manufacture
• Laser may give speckle
• LED not coherent, not
monochromatic but cheap, low
consumption, higly integrable
• OLED low lifetime
Tradeoffs: optics
The challenges II
13. 13
What is a HMD?
Three types
SEE-THROUGH
SEE-AROUND
Look-at OCCLUDED
(VR and not AR)
15. 15
What is a HMD?
Head-mounted display
(HMD)
Head-up display
(HUD)
Head-mounted display (HMD)
Helmet mounted display (HMD)
Head Worn display
Wearable Display
Eyewear
Near to Eye Display (NED)
----
Head Up Display (HUD)
Augmented Reality
definitions
16. What is a HMD?
Ivan E. Sutherland, The Sword of Damocle
17. What is a HMD?
1st holographic Head Up Display, 1997
Upatnieks,
ENRIM, Environmental Research Institute of Michigan
18. What is a HMD?
18
1968 today
Ivan Sutherland,
The “Sword of Damocles”
A head mounted three dim display
Lumus’ Eyeglasses
19. What is a HMD?
19
FIRST AFTER
BT-200 BT-300
source http://www.epson.com
BT-100
EPSON - MOVERIO
34. www.lostinreality.net
The test case: immersive experiencing
for user engagement in story telling applications
sara.mautino@gmail.com
mark.melnykowycz@gmail.com
or:
HOW TO CHOOSE a HMD
35. original Motivation:
how to choose a HMD?
HMD
Technology application
S.Mautino, M.Melnykowycz, “User-
experience in wearable displays: a
definition”, International AR Standards
Meeting, Barcelona, March 1-2, 2013
35
36. User-experience in wearable displays:
a proposal for standards definition
The test case of immersive experiencing
for user engagement in story-telling applications
MOTIVATIONS
Create/consume location
based stories
Search for stories around the
user
Use location to structure social
media communication
User experience more
important than technology
source: Lost In Reality @LstnReality
37. Optics( field of view …)
Connectivity (i/o signals, speed, band)
Developer - readiness
Price
User Experience Parameters ( to be defined)
i/o Interface
Optivent-ClearVu
Lumus
Oakley
Vuzix
Google Project GoogleVision
Google
Penny
http://www.penny.se/eng/
Epson-Moverio
BT-100
Kopin/Motorola
BENCHMARKING
38. User-experience in wearable displays:
a proposal for standards definition
Choice of a specific HMD for a given application.
HMD technology driven research. Not ‘born for the user’ as a tradition
Literature about UX in AR/HMD scarce, fragmented, unorganized
Ghost ofVenice mobile product [*] as a use case : how location and mobile
storytelling could be implemented with wearable displays
Need for a standard UX framework for Head Mounted Displays, to enable:
comparing, addressing, classifying, choosing
[*] Ghost of Venice: www.ghostsOfVenice.it
39. Surveys: counting
Augmented Reality User-centered studies I
not AR, 838
AR, 228
AR-HCI, 17
AR-HCI-UX, 21
not AR AR AR-HCI AR-HCI-UX
Total 1104
J. E. Swan and J. L. Gabbard, “Survey of user-based experimentation in augmented reality,”
in Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Virtual Reality, 2005, pp. 1–9.
2004: Swan & Gabbard
8%
2%
40. Surveys: counting
Augmented Reality User-centered studies II
Publisher databases 1992-2007
– ACM Digital Library
– IEEE Xplore
(out of 30)
AR related 54.5%
with UX analysis 10%
AR, 3148
not AR,
2762
AR-UX, 161
Total 6071
Ad-hoc design of queries and keywords: cyclic counting and filtering
2010: Dunser & al.
41. User Experience –example from NRC
Text reading comparison on different devices as an example
(Nokia Research Center)
42. UX in AR- ‘counting’ state of the art.The message from three survey works
Take concepts form past, integrate and generalize
Tools for evaluation
• subjective: SSQ, VSQ, NasaTask load
• non parametric Statistics
Examples:
I. Subjective variables
II. Objective variables
III. Evaluation Methods
Flowchart
Variable Ecosystem
Conclusions
User-experience in wearable displays:
a proposal for standards definition
A proposal
42
43. Tools I
Subjective Indexes Questionnaires
Visual Symptoms
VSQ
Simulator Sickness
SSQ
Nasa Task Load Index
NASA-TLX
43
44. Tools I
Subjective Indexes Questionnaires
• Visual Symptoms
VSQ
Simulator Sickness
SSQ
Nasa Task Load Index
NASA-TLX
44
45. Tools II – Non parametric Statistical Tests
no assumptions about probability distributions of population
comparing two sample series of related values
(‘before’ and ‘after’ exposure)
Wilcoxon signed ranks
Kruskal-Wallis
GLM Univariate
Mann-Whitney U
Kendall’s tau-b
comparing more than two not related samples
(i.e. like an opinion change)
paired comparisons: one of two samples have
one significantly larger value?
correlation between two measured quantities
45
46. Example II
–Task –
walking through
mall/shopping
with see-around HMD
watching video contents
Objective data:
heart rate
walking speed
# n. subject’s sight switches
46
47. Sketching a generalized testing approach: a UX flow
Building a User Experience Variable Ecosistem for Wearable Displays
Lesson learnt- gather and adapt state of the art results
Results
47
49. Building aVariables Ecosystem
A Matrix for User Experience in Wearable Displays
User test cases
User
Object
Context
System
Task
Questionnaire
Statistics
Variables
49
51. HMD/smart-glasses APPLICATIONS
growing Use Cases ecosystem
•Healthcare
• entertainment
• Marketing
• Products showcasing (houses,
cloths, furniture etc..)
•Turism
• Transportation
• cars
• Motorbikes
• aviation
• Education
• simulation
• Field applications
• Maintenance
• manufacturing
• Inspection
• training
• Cultural Heritage
• military
• gaming
•disabilities
51
52. EC H2020: SatisFactory
Data collection and analysis
Production Optimization
Collaboration and knowledge sharing
Augmented Reality and Gamification
field
applications
52
53. Ghosts of Venice
a Mixed Reality Film
an Augmented Reality Experience
www.ghostsofvenice.it
Mark Melnykowycz Marco Gatti Sara Mautino
• Edutainment
• Cultural Heritage
• Tourism
• Gaming
