Evaluating Display Types for AR Selection and Annotation

  • Authors:

  • Jason Wither;Stephen DiVerdi;Tobias Hollerer

  • Affiliations:

  • Four Eyes Laboratory, Computer Science Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA. e-mail: jwither@cs.ucsb.edu;Four Eyes Laboratory, Computer Science Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA. e-mail: sdiverdi@cs.ucsb.edu;Four Eyes Laboratory, Computer Science Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA. e-mail: holl@cs.ucsb.edu

  • Venue:
  • ISMAR '07 Proceedings of the 2007 6th IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality
  • Year:
  • 2007

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This paper evaluates different display devices for selection or annotation tasks in augmented reality (AR). We compare three different display types - a head mounted display and two hand held displays. The first hand held display is configured as a magic lens where the user sees the augmented space directly behind the display. The second hand held display is configured to be used at waist level (as one would commonly hold a tablet computer) but the view is still of the scene in front of the user. Making a selection or annotation in AR requires two distinct tasks by the user. First, the user must find the real (or virtual) object they want to mark. Second, the user must move a cursor to the object's location. We test and compare our three representative displays with respect to both tasks. We found that using a hand held display in the magic lens configuration was faster for cursor movement than either of the other two displays. There was no significant difference among the displays regarding the amount of time it took users to search for either physical or virtual objects.