Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized in ...

2 downloads 0 Views 547KB Size Report
Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, USA e-mail: [email protected] .... Springer US, Boston, MA, pp 125–129. 110. Milgram P, Kishino ...
Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized in SpringerLink Book Title

Proceedings of Workshops and Posters at the 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2017)

Series Title Chapter Title

Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

Copyright Year

2018

Copyright HolderName

Springer International Publishing AG

Corresponding Author

Family Name

Oprean

Particle Given Name

Danielle

Prefix Suffix Division

Author

Organization

Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email

[email protected]

Family Name

Wallgrün

Particle Given Name

Jan Oliver

Prefix Suffix Division

ChoroPhronesis, Department of Geography

Organization

The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email Author

Family Name

Pinto Duarte

Particle Given Name

Jose Manuel

Prefix Suffix Division Organization

Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email Author

Family Name

Pereira

Particle Given Name

Debora Verniz

Prefix Suffix Division Organization

Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email Author

Family Name

Zhao

Particle Given Name

Jiayan

Prefix Suffix Division

ChoroPhronesis, Department of Geography

Organization

The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email Author

Family Name

Klippel

Particle Given Name

Alexander

Prefix Suffix Division

ChoroPhronesis, Department of Geography

Organization

The Pennsylvania State University

Address

State College, USA

Email Abstract

Keywords (separated by '-')

We present our work on creating and assessing virtual field trip experiences using different VR and AR setups. In comparative studies, we address the question of how different settings and technologies compare regarding their ability to convey different kinds of spatial information and to foster spatial learning. We focus on a case study on an informal settlement in Rio, Brazil, in which we used an informal assessment to help inform and improve the design of different VR site experiences.

Author Proof

Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

RO

OF

Danielle Oprean, Jan Oliver Wallgrün, Jose Manuel Pinto Duarte, Debora Verniz Pereira, Jiayan Zhao and Alexander Klippel

8

Keywords ■■■

9

1 Introduction

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

TE

Immersive virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) technologies are seeing a resurgence in popularity thanks to massively improved and more cost-effective products, a trend that can be expected to lead to an increased usage of VR approaches in the education of fields that are inherently spatial, such as architecture, archeology, or the geosciences. They enable field trip-like classroom experiences of places that are inaccessible or too expensive to visit. However, while empirical studies have shown the potential of VR in the teaching-learning process (Barilli et al. 2011; Roussou 2004), there still exist many challenges for designing effective learning environments for different available devices as well as many open questions on how approaches and technologies affect the conveyance of spatial information and spatial learning in general.

EC

6

RR

5

CO

3 4

D. Oprean (✉) ⋅ J.M. Pinto Duarte ⋅ D.V. Pereira Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, USA e-mail: [email protected]

UN

2

DP

7

Abstract We present our work on creating and assessing virtual field trip experiences using different VR and AR setups. In comparative studies, we address the question of how different settings and technologies compare regarding their ability to convey different kinds of spatial information and to foster spatial learning. We focus on a case study on an informal settlement in Rio, Brazil, in which we used an informal assessment to help inform and improve the design of different VR site experiences.

1

J.O. Wallgrün ⋅ J. Zhao ⋅ A. Klippel ChoroPhronesis, Department of Geography, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, USA © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 P. Fogliaroni et al. (eds.), Proceedings of Workshops and Posters at the 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2017), Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-63946-8_22 440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

1

AQ1

D. Oprean et al.

TE

DP

RO

OF

Author Proof

2

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

RR

23 24

In our work, we have been designing virtual experiences for different devices, (including consumer-level VR platforms such as the HTC Vive as well as mobile VR solutions such as the Google Cardboard/Daydream and Samsung GearVR) and in different domains. Figure 1 shows some examples of this work: a VR experience of the Icelandic volcano Thrihnukar that provides interactive tools for geoscientists, for example, to perform measurements (Zhao et al. 2017) (Fig. 1a), and a VR tour for the Penn State main campus (Fig. 1b). We are also currently designing a VR field trip for the ancient Mayan site of Cahal Pech in Belize for archeologists and the general public, and we have started to extend these projects to also create AR-based in-situ experiences of the different sites (see Fig. 1c). In the following, we outline an informal study from the area of (landscape) architecture about the virtual experience of the informal settlement Santa Marta in Rio, Brazil. We summarize how the results of the study were used to improve the design of other environments used for exploring topics in the geosciences.

CO

22

UN

21

EC

Fig. 1 Examples of VR site experiences created for different spatial science fields: a Experience of the Icelandic volcano Thrihnukar for geoscientist. b A VR tour of the Penn State main campus (overview map left, image view with zoom-in map right). c First prototype of an AR application displaying historic information about objects on the Penn State campus

440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

35

3

2 VR Experiences and Study

60

3 Improvements to VR Experiences

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

61 62 63 64 65 66 67

RO

44 45

DP

42 43

TE

40 41

EC

39

RR

38

Through the use of our informal evaluations of the Santa Marta VR experience, we have made improvements to the process for generating VR experiences for different scenarios. The evaluations provided user-based insight to help resolve and inform development of features as well as helping to identify different concerns. We identified a number of issues and received different suggestions that we were able to use to improve the VR experience for Santa Marta and for other VR experiences, as summarized below.

CO

37

OF

59

In over a year’s worth of development and testing, we designed three different VR systems for site experiences of a single location for the Santa Marta informal settlement in Rio, Brazil. Figure 2 shows the three different site experiences we developed for the HTC Vive, Android based smartphones in combination with the Google Cardboard (both developed in Unity3D1 ), and a WebVR based web site using A-Frame.2 While the general setup is the same on all three platforms, allowing the user to select different 360◦ images and videos through an overview map and then viewing the selected image in VR or on the screen, the details of the display and, in particular, the interface and interactions needed to be designed specifically for each of the three setups. In the study conducted during the development stage, students, participating in a joint architecture and landscape architecture studio course, remotely visited the settlement using all of the platforms. An informal exploration of students perceptions towards the platforms was used to gain insights into use in future architecture studios as well as design improvements for future development and implementation. The results demonstrate success of the platforms in making students aware of relevant visual site features such as configuration of public spaces, texture of building surfaces, and interplay of light and shadow. They also show some limitations related to failing to engage other senses and the social dimension, which are essential to convey more complex dimensions of the space. We are currently working on more formal evaluations to assess different experiences. However, some results pertaining to the development specifically were used to make improvements to not only the Santa Marta VR experience but our other projects that followed in development afterwards.

36

UN

Author Proof

Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

1 https://unity3d.com/. 2

https://aframe.io/. 440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

D. Oprean et al.

UN

CO

RR

EC

TE

DP

RO

OF

Author Proof

4

Fig. 2 Different versions of the settlement experience with the view of the user shown at the top right of each of the images: a VR setup in the HTC Vive, b VR setup for Android-based smartphone in combination with the Google Cardboard, c web site version

440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

Author Proof

Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

5

77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

DP

TE

75 76

∙ Ergonomic issues such as feeling disorientated and nauseous, also referred to as motion sickness (Hettinger and Riccio 1992); ∙ a rather complex technology for getting content to users in comparison with other media such as the World Wide Web; ∙ substantial costs for everyone who wants to use a VR system.

EC

73 74

It is fair to say that none of these issues, at a broader scale, exist anymore (Slater and Sanchez-Vives 2016). It is important to note that the second barrier identified by Fisher and Unwin (2002) has been largely addressed by advances in software technology but specifically by advances in the spatial sciences through developments in environmental sensing (Khorram et al. 2012). This is the time for the spatial sciences to seriously deconstruct the opportunities afforded by immersive technologies as a communication paradigm. Our group is embracing these opportunities in two ways. First, through a thorough investigation of characteristics of immersive technologies with a goal to identify those that matter for improving communication, understanding, and learning (an approach also termed the foundational approach (Oprean 2014)). Within this approach we are currently comparing, more systematically, differences induced by, for example, different fields of view (Oprean et al. 2017). Second, by developing efficient workflows that allow bringing content into an immersive environment we can further explore how individuals interact and analyze data from climate change (Simpson et al. 2016), to volcanos (Zhao et al. 2017), to less accessible places such as informal settlements and archeological sites. The joint future of spatial sciences and immersive technologies is bright. As we continue with development of different VR experiences, we hope to be able to use more formal assessment to refine and improve our workflows and end products.

RR

71 72

Immersive technologies, from AR to VR and everything in between (Milgram and Kishino 1994), have finally weeded out issues that were seen as barriers for them to become a phenomenon of mass communication, like maps. Just a decade ago, (Fisher and Unwin 2002) identified three major issues of VR systems:

CO

69 70

4 Conclusions and Outlook

UN

68

RO

OF

Issues/Suggestion identified Implementation Image quality Added image labels for reference to currently viewed image Testing for highest quality image that would be compatible across multiple devices Correcting inverted image mapping to sphere Added workbench feature for allowing information recording within VR experiences Accuracy Incorporating geo-referencing of content Spatial perceptions Adjusting the camera settings in the VR camera to match the actual camera Other modalities Adding 360 sound to the experiences Adding controller support to the mobile version Video features Incorporating a Pause/Play ability for videos

440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

D. Oprean et al.

101

References

110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128

RO

108 109

DP

106 107

TE

104 105

Barilli ECVC, Ebecken NFF, Cunha GG (2011) The technology of virtual reality resource for information in public health in the distance: an application for the learning of anthropometric procedures. Ciênc. saúde coletiva 16:1247–1256 Fisher P, Unwin D (2002) Virtual reality in geography: an introduction. In: Fisher PF, Unwin D (eds) Virtual reality in geography. Taylor & Francis, London, New York, pp 1–4 Hettinger LJ, Riccio GE (1992) Visually induced motion sickness in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoper Virtual Environ 1(3):306–310 Khorram S, Koch FH, van der Wiele CF, Nelson SAC (2012) Future trends in remote sensing. In: Remote sensing. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp 125–129 Milgram P, Kishino F (1994) A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E77-D(12):1321–1329 Oprean D (2014) Understanding the immersive experience: Examining the influence of visual immersiveness and interactivity on spatial experiences and understanding. Doctoral dissertation. University of Missouri Oprean D, Simpson M, Klippel A (submitted) Remote immersive collaboration: an evaluation of immersive capabilities on spatial experiences and team membership. J Digit Earth Roussou M (2004) Learning by doing and learning through play. An exploration of interactivity in virtual environments for children. Comput Entertain 2(1) Simpson M, Wallgrün JO, Klippel A, Yang L, Garner G, Keller K, Bansal S (2016) Immersive analytics for multi-objective dynamic integrated climate-economy (DICE) models. In: Hancock M, Marquardt N, Schöning J, Tory M (eds) Proceedings of the 2016 ACM companion on interactive surfaces and spaces—ISS Companion ’16. ACM Press, New York, USA, pp 99–105 Slater M, Sanchez-Vives MV (2016) Enhancing our lives with immersive virtual reality. Front Robot AI 3:74 Zhao J, Wallgrün JO, LaFemina P, Oprean D, Klippel A (2017) iVR for geosciences. In: Second workshop on K-12 embodied learning through virtual and augmented reality (KELVAR). IEEE Digital Library

EC

103

RR

102

CO

99

OF

100

Acknowledgements Support for this research by the Penn State Center for Online Innovation and Learning (COIL), the Stuckeman Center for Design Computing (SCDC), the National ScienceFoundation under Grant Number NSF #1526520, and by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) is gratefully acknowledged.

97 98

UN

Author Proof

6

440507_1_En_22_Chapter ✓ TYPESET

DISK

LE ✓ CP Disp.:8/8/2017 Pages: 7 Layout: T1-Standard

Author Proof

Author Queries

Query Refs.

Details Required

Author’s response

As keywords are mandatory for this chapter, please provide 3–6 keywords.

UN

CO

RR

EC

TE

DP

RO

AQ1

OF

Chapter 22

MARKED PROOF Please correct and return this set Please use the proof correction marks shown below for all alterations and corrections. If you wish to return your proof by fax you should ensure that all amendments are written clearly in dark ink and are made well within the page margins. Instruction to printer Leave unchanged Insert in text the matter indicated in the margin Delete

Textual mark under matter to remain

New matter followed by or through single character, rule or underline or through all characters to be deleted

Substitute character or substitute part of one or more word(s) Change to italics Change to capitals Change to small capitals Change to bold type Change to bold italic Change to lower case Change italic to upright type

under matter to be changed under matter to be changed under matter to be changed under matter to be changed under matter to be changed Encircle matter to be changed (As above)

Change bold to non-bold type

(As above)

Insert ‘superior’ character

Marginal mark

through letter or through characters

through character or where required

or new character or new characters

or under character e.g.

Insert ‘inferior’ character

(As above)

Insert full stop Insert comma

(As above)

Insert single quotation marks

(As above)

Insert double quotation marks

(As above)

over character e.g.

(As above) or

or

(As above)

Transpose Close up Insert or substitute space between characters or words Reduce space between characters or words

linking

and/or

or

or

Insert hyphen Start new paragraph No new paragraph

or

characters

through character or where required

between characters or words affected

and/or