Remixed Reality

Lindlbauer, David; Wilson, Andy

doi:10.1145/3173574.3173703

Cited by 108 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…AV applications are very rare due to the technical challenge of tracking the pose of elements from the real-world and the difficulty of on the fly 3D reconstruction and streaming of scenes from the real-word into the virtual one. However, a recent study by Lindlbauer and Wilson (2018) attempted to perform a live 3D reconstruction of the physical environment where a VR user was physically situated. The authors used eight Kinect cameras for a room-scale coverage to stream scenes from the real word.…”

Section: Forms Of Immersive Realitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Immersive Realities and Interaction Methods: Cultural Learning in Virtual Heritage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Virtuality (AV), and Mixed Reality (MxR) have become popular immersive reality technologies for cultural knowledge dissemination in Virtual Heritage (VH). These technologies have been utilized for enriching museums with a personalized visiting experience and digital content tailored to the historical and cultural context of the museums and heritage sites. Various interaction methods, such as sensor-based, device-based, tangible, collaborative, multimodal, and hybrid interaction methods, have also been employed by these immersive reality technologies to enable interaction with the virtual environments. However, the utilization of these technologies and interaction methods isn't often supported by a guideline that can assist Cultural Heritage Professionals (CHP) to predetermine their relevance to attain the intended objectives of the VH applications. In this regard, our paper attempts to compare the existing immersive reality technologies and interaction methods against their potential to enhance cultural learning in VH applications. To objectify the comparison, three factors have been borrowed from existing scholarly arguments in the Cultural Heritage (CH) domain. These factors are the technology's or the interaction method's potential and/or demonstrated capability to: (1) establish a contextual relationship between users, virtual content, and cultural context, (2) allow collaboration between users, and (3) enable engagement with the cultural context in the virtual environments and the virtual environment itself. Following the comparison, we have also proposed a specific integration of collaborative and multimodal interaction methods into a Mixed Reality (MxR) scenario that can be applied to VH applications that aim at enhancing cultural learning in situ .

show abstract

Section: Forms Of Immersive Realitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Immersive Realities and Interaction Methods: Cultural Learning in Virtual Heritage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most flexible way for presenting remote imagery is via virtual reality. An example of this is recent work by Lindlbauer and Wilson, who explored the concept of remixed reality, whereas user's viewpoint can be moved to an arbitrary location, while the scene's objects can be copied, moved, and removed on demand [16]. While many of the above ways of presenting the remote visual information work well for exploration tasks, they are not well suited for tasks that also require manipulation of the observed.…”

Section: Presenting the Viewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such dynamic cameras enable users to control the camera's orientation and location, allowing the users to select a perspective relevant to the task at hand. Some techniques from augmented reality allow for arbitrary viewpoint positioning (e.g., [16,22]). Being able to control the remote camera's perspective can alleviate the frame-of-reference issues, while at the same time causing a new set of problems related to viewpoint instability and counter-intuitive control of the remote view.…”

Section: Visualizing Occluded Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented Reality Views for Occluded Interaction

Lilija

Pohl

Boring

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another meta analysis identified a set of design dimensions for collaborative AR applications: space, time, mobility, virtual content, user roles, and visualization hardware [8]. In this work, we focus on two of those dimensions that are particularly relevant for collaborative creation [30]: time and space (see Table 1).…”

Section: Collaboration In Armentioning

confidence: 99%

Blocks

Guo

Canberk

Murphy

et al. 2019

Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fig. 1. AR structures showing the diversity of creations people built collaboratively using Blocks. Here we highlight a few structures, including two tables, a sailboat, a tree, a robot, a dog, a castle and a gingerbread man.We introduce Blocks, a mobile application that enables people to co-create AR structures that persist in the physical environment. Using Blocks, end users can collaborate synchronously or asynchronously, whether they are colocated or remote. Additionally, the AR structures can be tied to a physical location or can be accessed from anywhere. We evaluated how people used Blocks through a series of lab and field deployment studies with over 160 participants, and explored the interplay between two collaborative dimensions: space and time. We found that participants preferred creating structures synchronously with colocated collaborators. Additionally, they were most active when they created structures that were not restricted by time or place. Unlike most of today's AR experiences, which focus on content consumption, this work outlines new design opportunities for persistent and collaborative AR experiences that empower anyone to collaborate and create AR content.

show abstract

Remixed Reality

Cited by 108 publications

References 45 publications

A Comparison of Immersive Realities and Interaction Methods: Cultural Learning in Virtual Heritage

A Comparison of Immersive Realities and Interaction Methods: Cultural Learning in Virtual Heritage

Augmented Reality Views for Occluded Interaction

Blocks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About