2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2010.08.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of viewing angle on wrist posture estimation from photographic images using novice raters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
17
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Observation of worker posture in person or by photographic/video analysis is common practice, and analysis of this method has received much attention (Paul and Douwes 1993;Juul-Kristensen et al 2001;Lowe 2004;Lau and Armstrong 2011). During a validation experiment, the photographic method employed here had a mean error of^38 and a variance of 78.Differences in natural hand/handle angle across handle conditions (at most 28 ) were small compared to this error, so it is difficult to make conclusions regarding specific effects.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Observation of worker posture in person or by photographic/video analysis is common practice, and analysis of this method has received much attention (Paul and Douwes 1993;Juul-Kristensen et al 2001;Lowe 2004;Lau and Armstrong 2011). During a validation experiment, the photographic method employed here had a mean error of^38 and a variance of 78.Differences in natural hand/handle angle across handle conditions (at most 28 ) were small compared to this error, so it is difficult to make conclusions regarding specific effects.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Since photographs represent a two-dimensional projection of the actual three-dimensional marker triad positions, 'perspective' or 'parallax' error is introduced by the camera lens when the optical axis is not precisely orthogonal to the local wrist 'RUD' plane (Paul and Douwes 1993;Lau and Armstrong 2011). The camera placement was chosen to minimise this perspective error; however, participant posture during push exertions was not constrained.…”
Section: Camera-based Calculation Validation Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the camera view is not perpendicular to this plane of motion, perspective error may result. However, studies have shown that accurate posture classification can be attained in these situations [Sutherland et al 2007] and that estimation error due to parallax is often less than would be predicted by the spatial relationship between the camera and the joint observed [Lau and Armstrong 2011]. Nonetheless, when possible, the camera should be oriented perpendicularly to the plane of motion to obtain an ideal view.…”
Section: Camera Movement Stability and Framingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An example would be the use of relative length of the hand and fingers to classify wrist posture [Lau and Armstrong 2011]. Wrist flexion/extension is not well observed from a dorsal (back side) view of the hand (Figure 3).…”
Section: Visual Reference Of Posture Angles Improves Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2003, the parallax problems could be solved by tracking feature points interior [5]. In 2004, according to feature spots in stereo images, distortion of lens and luminance could be improved [6]. In 2005, in terms of the position of 3D and motion of object, the problems of stereo camera positions and reflections could be adjusted by drawing software [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%