CRISTAL Design and Implementation of a Remote Control System Based on a Multi-touch Display

Transcription

1 CRISTAL Design and Implementation of a Remote Control System Based on a Multi-touch Display Thomas Seifried 1, Michael Haller 1, Stacey D. Scott 2, Florian Perteneder 1, Christian Rendl 1, Daisuke Sakamoto 3, Masahiko Inami 3 1 Upper Austria University of Applied Sciences 2 University of Waterloo 3 Keio University

2 Motivation

3 Motivation How to control that many different devices?

4 How to retain group interaction with virtual media?

5 Solution: Many Devices Many devices = many buttons!

6 Solution: Many Devices Touchscreens! Many devices = many buttons!

7 Solution: Group Interaction? How could a collaborative remote look like?

8 CRISTAL

9

10 Previous Work

11 Home Control Remotable 1 Sketch and Run 2 Beijar et al. Sakamoto et al. 1) Beijar, J., Leinerud, D., Nilsson, R., Thorin, P., and Weimar, G. Remoteable: Managing a Built-in Media Center with the Table Top Surface. Conference Supplement of Tabletop '07, (2007). 2) Sakamoto, D., Honda, K., Inami, M., and Igarashi, T. Sketch and run: a stroke-based interface for home robots. Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM (2009),

12 Interaction via video Hyperplant [1] Interactive Video in FlySPEC [2] Tani et al. Liao et al. 1) Tani, M., Yamaashi, K., Tanikoshi, K., Futakawa, M., and Tanifuji, S. Object-oriented video: interaction with real-world objects through live video. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM (1992), ) Liao, C., Liu, Q., Kimber, D., Chiu, P., Foote, J., and Wilcox, L. Shared interactive video for teleconferencing. Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on Multimedia, ACM (2003),

13 CRISTAL

14 Goals Develop a user interface that: Controls all electronic devices in a living room and Supports group interaction

15 Why Tabletop? Ubiquitous Multi-User Supports group interaction

16 Instant Feedback The video image itself is the interface 1 Camera image 1) Tani, M., Yamaashi, K., Tanikoshi K., Futakawa M., and Tanifuji S., Object-oriented video: interaction with realworld objects through live video, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Monterey, California, USA (1992), pp

17 Many different devices Many electronic devices: Lights Window blinds Audio Displays / TV Digital Picture Frames Robotic vacuum cleaner But they work very different Needed: Easy to understand interaction metaphor

18 Controlling Devices Video image: User recognize devices easily Provides area for interaction Gesture-based input: Discrete States on/off Continuous Value audio volume 0 100% Location/Speed Media selection play Movie Bolt on TV Path for vacuum cleaner robot

19 Gestures - Continuous Controlling speaker volume

20 Gestures - Continuous Direction of Input Axis aligned (a) Object aligned (b)

21 Gestures - Continuous Object oriented approach: How to increase, how to decrease a value? Idea: Top & bottom of real object

22 Media Selection? Media Server

23 Media Selection

24 Media Selection / Display

25 Media Selection Tabletop is not well suited for watching a movie! Tabletop is for choosing a movie! Simulate DVD boxes: DVD cover additional information and a preview

26 Media Selection / Display Basic Idea: World in Miniature 1 Destination Display Source / Access Interface Screenshot 1) Biehl, J.T. and B.P. Bailey. ARIS: An Interface for Application Relocation in an Interactive Space. Proceedings of Graphics Interface, 2004,

27 Pilot Study

28 Pilot Study Qualitative Study Primary Goals: Evaluate the usability and design decisions Direction of interaction Viewing angle of video Procedure: 1. Tasks (Observation) 2. Semi-structured Interview 3. Questionnaire

29 Participants & Apparatus 16 participants (12 male, 4 female) Controlled laboratory setting

30 Direction of interaction Preferred direction of interaction:? Axis aligned Object aligned None Preferrence: 4 of of 16 0

31 Video angle Preferred viewing angle:? Birds eye Perspective None 12 of 16 2 of 16 2 of 16

32 Evaluation Results Overall: Very positive feedback 15 of 16 rated 4 or 5 (good, very good) Rating by controlled device: 1 = very bad 5 = very good

33 Conclusion Future Work

34 Conclusions & Future Work Live video image very useful Privacy concerns Devices not covered by video image

35 Conclusions & Future Work Bulky hardware Cluttered coffee table

36 Future Work

37 Thank you Thomas Seifried Media Interaction Lab