1 / 23

Evaluation of Viewport Size and Curvature of Large, High-Resolution Displays

Evaluation of Viewport Size and Curvature of Large, High-Resolution Displays. Lauren Shupp, Robert Ball, John Booker, Beth Yost, Chris North. Virginia Polytechnic and State University Center for Human Computer Interaction, Department of Computer Science http://infovis.cs.vt.edu. Outline.

randi
Download Presentation

Evaluation of Viewport Size and Curvature of Large, High-Resolution Displays

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation of Viewport Size and Curvature of Large, High-Resolution Displays Lauren Shupp, Robert Ball, John Booker, Beth Yost, Chris North Virginia Polytechnic and State University Center for Human Computer Interaction, Department of Computer Science http://infovis.cs.vt.edu

  2. Outline • Motivation & Related Work • Experimental Design • Results & Observations • Conclusions & Impact • Questions

  3. Related Work • Physical constructionMark Hereld, Ivan R. Judson and Rick L. Stevens. Tutorial: Introduction to building project-based tiled display systems • Software for distributing the graphicsGreg Humphreys, et. al. Chromium: A stream-processing framework for interactive rendering on clusters • Most usability research is for collaborationScott Elrod, et. al. Liveboard: A large interactive display supporting group meetings, presentations, and remote collaboration.

  4. Related Work • Partitioned spaces vs. one large spaceJonathan Grudin. Partitioning digital worlds: Focal and peripheral awareness in multiple monitor use. • Horizontal monitors as separate rooms and vertical as single spacesRobert Ball and Chris North. An analysis of user behavior on high-resolution tiled displays. • Larger displays narrow gender gap on spatial performanceMary Czerwinski, Desney Tan and George Robertson. Women take a wider view. • Focus+Context screensPatrick Baudisch, Nathaniel Good, Victoria Bellotti and Pamela Schraedley. Keeping things in context: A comparative evaluation of focus plus context screens, overviews, and zooming.

  5. Related Work • Large (3x3) high-resolution (3840×3072) displays can result in better performance than panning and zooming on smaller displaysRobert Ball and Chris North. Effects of tiled high-resolution display on basic visualization and navigation tasks.

  6. Motivation: Viewport Is bigger (viewport) better? Is there a display that is too big? • More detailed data & more context at once(3072 x 10,240) • Physical navigation using eye, head, and body movement

  7. Motivation: Curvature What happens if we curve the display? • Reduce time physically navigating • Change physical navigation to less strenuous turning rather than walking

  8. Motivation: Curvature • All pixels are resolvable using only head and eye movements (2.75 times more resolvable pixels on our 24 monitor display)

  9. Experimental Design • Independent variable: display condition • Dependent variables: time, accuracy, and mental-workload (mental demand, physical demand, effort, and frustration) 8 users in each (40 total)

  10. Experimental Design

  11. Tasks • Search

  12. Route Tracing portion of Expressway 402 East of Atlanta, GA (labeled Highway 8)

  13. Tasks • Route Tracing

  14. Tasks • Image comparison

  15. Results Suggests both larger viewport sizes and curvature improve user performance times

  16. Results: Task Specific Both the 12 and 24 monitor conditions improve performance over one monitor (approximately 2-6 times faster) For route tasks, the 24 monitor condition improves performance over the 12 monitor condition (approximately 50% faster)

  17. Results: Task Specific Curved displays improve performance over flat displays independently of viewport size For route tasks, the 24 monitor condition improves performance over the 12 monitor condition (approximately 50% faster)

  18. Results

  19. Observations • Viewport Size • One monitor used significantly more virtual navigation (pan & zoom) • 12 and 24 monitor used more physical navigation (standing, walking, leaning) • Strategies changed by second Image comparison task (switch from serial pattern to overview  target)

  20. Observations • Curvature • Change in physical navigation • Flat: standing (5/8), walking • Curved: body and head turns • Keyboard and mouse may have hindered users on the flat display from walkingmore • Users changed their area of focus more frequently on the curved 24 monitor condition

  21. Conclusions • Larger viewport sizes improve performance • Search: 12 better than 1 mon • Route: 24 better than 12 mon • Larger viewport sizes reduce virtual navigation and increase physical navigation • Larger viewport sizes yield less frustration • Curved displays improve performance time • Physical navigation changes from standing and walking to turning when the display is curved

  22. Impact • 24 monitor display is not too big! • Curve large displays for single users

  23. Questions ? Virginia Polytechnic and State University Center for Human Computer Interaction, Department of Computer Science http://infovis.cs.vt.edu

More Related