Design and Evaluation of Visual Interpenetration Cues in Virtual Grasping
© 1995-2012 IEEE. We present design and impact studies of visual feedback for virtual grasping. The studies suggest new or updated guidelines for feedback. Recent grasping techniques incorporate visual cues to help resolve undesirable visual or performance artifacts encountered after real fingers en...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/43468 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Mahidol University |
| Summary: | © 1995-2012 IEEE. We present design and impact studies of visual feedback for virtual grasping. The studies suggest new or updated guidelines for feedback. Recent grasping techniques incorporate visual cues to help resolve undesirable visual or performance artifacts encountered after real fingers enter a virtual object. Prior guidelines about such visuals are based largely on other interaction types and provide inconsistent and potentially-misleading information when applied to grasping. We address this with a two-stage study. In the first stage, users adjusted parameters of various feedback types, including some novel aspects, to identify promising settings and to give insight into preferences regarding the parameters. In the next stage, the tuned feedback techniques were evaluated in terms of objective performance (finger penetration, release time, and precision) and subjective rankings (visual quality, perceived behavior impact, and overall preference). Additionally, subjects commented on the techniques while reviewing them in a final session. Performancewise, the most promising techniques directly reveal penetrating hand configuration in some way. Subjectively, subjects appreciated visual cues about interpenetration or grasp force, and color changes are most promising. The results enable selection of the best cues based on understanding the relevant tradeoffs and reasonable parameter values. The results also provide a needed basis for more focused studies of specific visual cues and for choosing conditions in comparisons to other feedback modes, such as haptic, audio, or multimodal. Considering results, we propose that 3D interaction guidelines must be updated to capture the importance of interpenetration cues, possible performance benefits of direct representations, and tradeoffs involved in cue selection. |
|---|