visual_displays - 3D User Interface Hardware Lecture #5:...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 3D User Interface Hardware Lecture #5: Visual Displays Spring 2011 Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Interaction Workflow Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 1 Introduction To Displays Display: device which presents perceptual information Often ‘display’ used to mean ‘visual display’ Goal: display devices which accurately Goal: display devices which accurately represent represent perceptions in simulated world Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Lecture Outline Visual System System Depth Cues Visual Display Characteristics Visual Display Examples Spring 2011 monitors surround screen displays workbenches head mounted displays armarm-mounted displays virtual retinal displays autostereoscopic displays CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 2 Vision Stimulus: light of wavelengths ~350-750 nm light of wavelengths 350 nm Gamma X UV Violet Blue 400 Infra Radar Green 500 Yellow 600 FM TV AM AC Red 700 Wavelength (nm) Visual dominance: 50% of brain involved in processing! Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Eye Physiology Camera metaphor: metaphor: lens (can change) film (retina) amount of exposure (pupil) Retina Lens Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 3 Retina Photoreceptors: rods & cones rods cones Distinction of function Spring 2011 rods: periphery, motion, B&W, sensitivity cones: fovea, static, color, acuity CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Rod/cone Distribution cones rods # rods/cones position on retina “blind spot” Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 4 Depth Cues – How Do We See 3D? Monocular/static cues cues Occulomotor cues Motion Parallax Binocular Disparity and Stereopsis Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Monocular/Static Cues Relative Size Size Height relative to horizon Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 5 Monocular/Static Cues Occlusion and Linear Perspective and Linear Perspective Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Monocular/Static Cues Shading, Lighting, and Texture Lighting and Texture Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 6 Oculomotor Cues Accommodation – physical stretching and relaxing of eye lens Convergence rotation of viewer eyes so images Convergence – rotation of viewer’s eyes so images can can be fused together at varying distances Spring 2011 CAP6121 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Motion Parallax Stationary viewer vs. moving viewer viewer vs moving viewer Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 7 Binocular Disparity and Stereopsis Each eye gets a slightly Each different image Only effective within a few feet of viewer Many implementation schemes Spring 2011 CAP6121 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. AccommodationAccommodation-Convergence Mismatch Standard stereo displays confuse the brain Standard stereo displays confuse the brain based based on oculomotor cues right-eye image left-eye image Only “true 3D” displays can provide these correctly Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 8 Visual Display Characteristics Field of View (FOV) and Field of Regard (FOR) Spatial Resolution FOR – amount of physical space surrounding viewer in which visual images appear images appear FOV – maximum visual angle seen instantaneously number of pixels and screen size Screen Geometry rectangular, hemispherical, etc… Light Transfer Mechanism Refresh Rate front projection, rear projection, laser light, etc… projection rear projection laser light etc not the same as frame rate Ergonomics Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Stereo Monitor Ordinary workstation equipped with emitter equipped with emitter and and shutter glasses Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 9 Stereo Monitor – Advantages Least expensive in terms of additional Least expensive in terms of additional hardware hardware over other output devices Allows usage of virtually any input device Good resolution User can take advantage of keyboard and User can take advantage of keyboard and mouse mouse Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Stereo Monitor – Disadvantages Not very immersive very immersive User really cannot move around Does not take advantage of peripheral vision Stereo can be problematic can be problematic Occlusion from physical objects can be problematic Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 10 Surround Screen VE (1) Has to large Has 3 to 6 large screens screens Puts user in a room for visual immersion Usually driven by a single or group of single or group of powerful powerful graphics engines Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Surround Screen VE (2) Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 11 Surround Screen VE (3) Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. SSVE – Advantages Spring 2011 Provides high resolution and large FOV User only needs a pair of light weight shutter glasses for stereo viewing User has freedom to move about the device Environment is not evasive Real and virtual objects can be mixed in the Real and virtual objects can be mixed in the environment environment A group of people can inhabit the space simultaneously CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 12 SSVE – Disadvantages Very expensive (6-7 figures) (6Requires a large amount of physical space Projector calibration must be maintained No more that two users can be head tracked Stereo viewing can be problematic viewing can be problematic Physical objects can get in the way of graphical objects Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. SSVE – Interface Design Do not need to represent physical objects (i (i.e. hands) as graphical objects Can take advantage of the user’s peripheral vision Do not want the user to get too close to the screens the screens Developer can take advantage of the space for using physical props (i.e. car, motion platform) Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 13 Workbenches and Variants (1) Similar to SSVE but Similar to SSVE but one one display (two at most) Can be a desk or a large single display (i.e. PowerWall) (i.e. PowerWall) Traditionally a table top metaphor Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Workbenches and Variants (2) Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 14 Workbenches and Variants (3) Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Workbenches – Advantages High resolution resolution For certain applications, makes for an intuitive display Can be shared by several users Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 15 Workbenches – Disadvantages Limited movement movement At most two users can be head tracked No surrounding screens Physical objects can get in the way of graphical objects graphical objects Stereo can be problematic Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Workbenches – Interface Design Ergonomics are important especially when Ergonomics are important especially when designing designing interfaces for table displays User can take advantage of direct penpenbased input if display surface permits No need to make graphical No need to make graphical representations representations of physical objects Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 16 Head Mounted Displays Device has either two CRT CRT or LCD screens plus LCD special optics in front of the users eyes User cannot naturally see the real world Provides a stereoscopic view that moves relative to the user Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. HMDs – Advantages Provides an immersive experience by blocking out the real world blockin Fairly easy to set up Does not restrict user from moving around in the real world Average quality HMD is relatively inexpensive Can achieve good stereo quality Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 17 HMDs – Disadvantages Average quality HMDs have poor resolution and field of view (FOV) resolution and field of view (FOV) Does not take advantage of peripheral vision Isolation and fear of real world events Good quality devices cost in the 100,000 Good quality devices cost in the 100,000 dollar dollar range Heavy and do not fit well Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. HMDs – Interface Design Physical objects require a graphical representation representation Limits the types of input devices that can be used Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 18 Arm Mounted Display (BOOM) Like a HMD but mounted on an mounted on an articulated articulated arm Mostly use CRT technology Not really used anymore anymore Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. BOOM – Advantages Provides better resolution than HMDs and Provides better resolution than HMDs and generally generally a higher FOV Light weight relative to the user Excellent tracking with minimal lag Easy to set up and switch users Easy to set up and switch users Good stereo quality Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 19 BOOM – Disadvantages Limited user movement user movement Like looking through binoculars Does not take advantage of peripheral vision Requires the user to hold onto the BOOM Requires the user to hold onto the BOOM for for control Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. BOOM – Interface Design Must have at least one hand on the device Must have at least one hand on the device which which limits two-handed interaction twoPhysical objects require graphical representation Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 20 Virtual Retinal Displays (VRD) Scans images directly onto the retina onto the retina Invented at the HIT Lab in 1991 Used for both virtual and augmented reality reality Commercially being developed at Microvision, Inc. Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. VRDs – Advantages Lightweight relative to the user relative to the user Ability for high resolution and FOV Potential for complete visual immersion Can achieve good stereo quality Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 21 VRDs – Disadvantages Currently has low resolution and FOV is Currently has low resolution and FOV is small small Displays are currently monochrome Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. VRDs – Interface Design Avenue of research of research Questions arise about eye movement Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 22 AutoStereoscopic Displays Lenticular Volumetric Holographic Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Which Visual Display to Use? Consider lists of pros and cons lists of pros and cons Consider depth cues supported Consider level of visual immersion But this is a very hard question to answer empirically empirically Spring 2011 CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 23 Next Class Audio and Haptic Audio and Haptic displays Readings Spring 2011 3DUI Book – Chapter 3, pages 29-59 29- CAP6121 – 3D User Interfaces for Games and Virtual Reality ©Joseph J. LaViola Jr. 24 ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/25/2011 for the course CAP 6121 taught by Professor Lavoilajr. during the Spring '11 term at University of Central Florida.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online