Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Actors in virtual studio productions are faced with the challenge that they have to interact with invisible virtual objects because these elements are rendered separately and combined with the real image later in the production process. Virtual sets typically use static virtual elements or animated objects with predefined behavior so that actors can practice their performance and errors can be corrected in the post production. With the demand for inexpensive live recording and interactive TV productions, virtual objects will be dynamically rendered at arbitrary positions that cannot be predicted by the actor. Perceptive aids have to be employed to support a natural interaction with these objects. In our work we study the effect of haptic feedback for a simple form of interaction. Actors are equipped with a custom built haptic belt and get vibro-tactile feedback during a small navigational task (path following). We present a prototype of a wireless vibro-tactile feedback device and a small framework for evaluating haptic feedback in a virtual set environment. Results from an initial pilot study indicate that vibro-tactile feedback is a suitable non-visual aid for interaction that is at least comparable to audio-visual alternatives used in virtual set productions. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1145/1517664.1517703 | Tangible and Embedded Interaction |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
wireless vibro-tactile feedback device,virtual set production,haptic feedback,invisible virtual object,static virtual element,virtual set environment,virtual set,virtual studio production,virtual object,vibro-tactile feedback,interactive tv,production process | Natural interaction,Wireless,Computer science,Interactive television,Post-production,Scheduling (production processes),Human–computer interaction,Real image,Virtual studio,Multimedia,Haptic technology | Conference |
Citations | PageRank | References |
6 | 0.74 | 12 |
Authors | ||
5 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Björn Wöldecke | 1 | 15 | 4.23 |
| Tom Vierjahn | 2 | 10 | 5.23 |
| Matthias Flasko | 3 | 6 | 0.74 |
| Jens Herder | 4 | 24 | 8.72 |
| Christian Geiger | 5 | 86 | 18.62 |