Large-screen Immersive Display Research Articles

Self and Body Part Localization in Virtual Reality: Comparing a Headset and a Large-Screen Immersive Display.

It is currently not fully understood where people precisely locate themselves in their bodies, particularly in virtual reality. To investigate this, we asked participants to point directly at themselves and to several of their body parts with a virtual pointer, in two virtual reality (VR) setups, a VR headset and a large-screen immersive display (LSID). There was a difference in distance error in pointing to body parts depending on VR setup. Participants pointed relatively accurately to many of their body parts (i.e., eyes, nose, chin, shoulders, and waist). However, in both VR setups when pointing to the feet and the knees they pointed too low, and for the top of the head too high (to larger extents in the VR headset). Taking these distortions into account, the locations found for pointing to self were considered in terms of perceived bodies, based on where the participants had pointed to their body parts in the two VR setups. Pointing to self in terms of the perceived body was mostly to the face, the upper followed by the lower, as well as some to the torso regions. There was no significant overall effect of VR condition for pointing to self in terms of the perceived body (but there was a significant effect of VR if only the physical body (as measured) was considered). In a paper-and-pencil task outside of VR, performed by pointing on a picture of a simple body outline (body template task), participants pointed most to the upper torso. Possible explanations for the differences between pointing to self in the VR setups and the body template task are discussed. The main finding of this study is that the VR setup influences where people point to their body parts, but not to themselves, when perceived and not physical body parts are considered.

Can I Recognize My Body's Weight? The Influence of Shape and Texture on the Perception of Self

The goal of this research was to investigate women's sensitivity to changes in their perceived weight by altering the body mass index (BMI) of the participants' personalized avatars displayed on a large-screen immersive display. We created the personalized avatars with a full-body 3D scanner that records the participants' body geometry and texture. We altered the weight of the personalized avatars to produce changes in BMI while keeping height, arm length, and inseam fixed and exploited the correlation between body geometry and anthropometric measurements encapsulated in a statistical body shape model created from thousands of body scans. In a 2 × 2 psychophysical experiment, we investigated the relative importance of visual cues, namely shape (own shape vs. an average female body shape with equivalent height and BMI to the participant) and texture (own photo-realistic texture or checkerboard pattern texture) on the ability to accurately perceive own current body weight (by asking the participant, “Is it the same weight as you?”). Our results indicate that shape (where height and BMI are fixed) had little effect on the perception of body weight. Interestingly, the participants perceived their body weight veridically when they saw their own photo-realistic texture. As compared to avatars with photo-realistic texture, the avatars with checkerboard texture needed to be significantly thinner in order to represent the participants' current weight. This suggests that in general the avatars with checkerboard texture appeared bigger. The range that the participants accepted as their own current weight was approximately a 0.83% to − 6.05% BMI change tolerance range around their perceived weight. Both the shape and the texture had an effect on the reported similarity of the body parts and the whole avatar to the participant's body. This work has implications for new measures for patients with body image disorders, as well as researchers interested in creating personalized avatars for games, training applications, or virtual reality.

Egocentric distance perception in large screen immersive displays

Many scientists have demonstrated that compared to the real world egocentric distances in head-mounted display virtual environments are underestimated. However, distance perception in large screen immersive displays has received less attention. We investigate egocentric distance perception in a virtual office room projected using a semi-spherical, a Max Planck Institute CyberMotion Simulator cabin and a flat large screen immersive display. The goal of our research is to systematically investigate distance perception in large screen immersive displays with commonly used technical specifications. We specifically investigate the role of distance to the target, stereoscopic projection and motion parallax on distance perception. We use verbal reports and blind walking as response measures for the real world experiment. Due to the limited space in the three large screen immersive displays we use only verbal reports as the response measure for the experiments in the virtual environment. Our results show an overall underestimation of distance perception in the large screen immersive displays, while verbal estimates of distances are nearly veridical in the real world. We find that even when providing motion parallax and stereoscopic depth cues to the observer in the flat large screen immersive display, participants estimate the distances to be smaller than intended. Although stereo cues in the flat large screen immersive display do increase distance estimates for the nearest distance, the impact of the stereoscopic depth cues is not enough to result in veridical distance perception. Further, we demonstrate that the distance to the target significantly influences the percent error of verbal estimates in both the real and virtual world. The impact of the distance to the target on the distance judgments is the same in the real world and in two of the used large screen displays, namely, the MPI CyberMotion Simulator cabin and the flat displays. However, in the semi-spherical display we observe a significantly different influence of distance to the target on verbal estimates of egocentric distances. Finally, we discuss potential reasons for our results. Based on the findings from our research we give general suggestions that could serve as methods for improving the LSIDs in terms of the accuracy of depth perception and suggest methods to compensate for the underestimation of verbal distance estimates in large screen immersive displays.

How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments?

We conducted two experiments that compared distance perception in real and virtual environments in six visual presentation methods using either timed imagined walking or direct blindfolded walking, while controlling for several other factors that could potentially impact distance perception. Our presentation conditions included unencumbered real world, real world seen through an HMD, virtual world seen through an HMD, augmented reality seen through an HMD, virtual world seen on multiple, large immersive screens, and photo-based presentation of the real world seen on multiple, large immersive screens. We found that there was a similar degree of underestimation of distance in the HMD and large-screen presentations of virtual environments. We also found that while wearing the HMD can cause some degree of distance underestimation, this effect depends on the measurement protocol used. Finally, we found that photo-based presentation did not help to improve distance perception in a large-screen immersive display system. The discussion focuses on points of similarity and difference with previous work on distance estimation in real and virtual environments.

Distance perception in real and virtual environments

We conducted three experiments to compare distance perception in real and virtual environments. In Experiment 1, adults estimated how long it would take to walk to targets in real and virtual environments by starting and stopping a stopwatch while looking at a target person standing between 20 and 120 ft away. The real environment was a large grassy lawn in front of a university building. We replicated this scene in our virtual environment using a nonstereoscopic, large-screen immersive display system. We found that people underestimated time to walk in both environments for distances of 40 to 60 ft and beyond. However, time-to-walk estimates were virtually identical across the two environments, particularly when people made real environment estimates first. In Experiment 2, 10- and 12-year-old children and adults estimated time to walk in real and virtual environments both with and without vision. Adults underestimated time to walk in both environments for distances of 60 to 80 ft and beyond. Again, their estimates were virtually identical in the real and virtual environment both with and without vision. Twelve-year-olds' time-to-walk estimates were also very similar across the two environments under both viewing conditions, but 10-year-olds exhibited greater underestimation in the virtual than in the real environment. A third experiment showed that adults' time-to-walk estimates were virtually identical to walking without vision. We conclude that distance perception may be better in virtual environments involving large-screen immersive displays than in those involving head-mounted displays (HMDS).