Project poster

Reality-based animation interfaces
Joshua Ramsbottom, Katherine Rix, and David Rix
2015

Abstract

Aims. Develop two alternative interfaces tailored for low-fidelity animation. Confirm accessibility of virtual reality (VR) interface for untrained users. Benchmark usability and explore usage barriers for tangible interface. Implementations. Both interfaces were developed through an iterative process of prototyping and expert interview. VR: Realized via a fully-occluding VR headset (Oculus Rift DK2). Users select objects via head-tracking and control the system with a gamepad. Tangible: Uses a depth sensor (Kinect for Xbox One) to detect the user's arrangement of 3D-printed camera and characters, and converts it to a virtual 3D scene. Methods. VR: Three heuristic experts engaged in free exploration of the system. Qualitative evaluation was performed through think-aloud assessment, open ended questions and filling out the system usability scale (SUS). Tangible: 20 animation professionals created 3D scenes from a storyboard. They then completed the SUS followed by a diagnostic questionnaire and interview. Results. VR: Object selection by head-tracking and translation via the gamepad were identified as easiest aspects of the interface. However, evaluators expected camera control via both gamepad and headset. Tangible: System was benchmarked at SUS score of 78.0, placing it in the category "good", and at the 82nd percentile of all systems surveyed in Sauro [2011]. Those with less 3D experience reliably preferred a tangible interface. Experienced users cited model inflexibility and lack of fine-grained control as barriers. Conclusions. VR allows users to better understand 3D spatial relationships. This shows promise for previz applications once usability issues are resolved. Tangible interfaces are highly usable, especially for those with little 3D experience. However, more flexible models and finer-grained control are required for mainstream industry adoption.

References

  1. Sacha Goedegebure, A. Goralczyk, E. Valenza, N. Vegdahl, W. Reynish, B. V. Lommel, C. Barton, J. Morgenstern, and T.Roosendaal. Big Buck Bunny. Retrieved November 1 2015 from https://peach.blender.org
  2. Joshua Ramsbottom. 2015. A virtual reality interface for previsualization. Honours report, University of Cape Town. 9 pages. November 2015. Retrieved November 16 2015 from http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~previz2015/virtual-reality/
  3. Katherine Rix. 2015. Viability of a tangible tabletop for industry storyboarding. Honours report, University of Cape Town. 13 pages. November 2015. Retrieved November 16 2015 from http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~previz2015/tangible/
  4. David Rix. 2015. The effect of luminiferous aether on ICP registration in a constrained tabletop environment. Honours report, University of Cape Town. 8 pages. November 2015. Retrieved November 16 2015 from http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~previz2015/registration/
  5. Jeff Sauro. 2011. A Practical Guide to the System Usability Scale: Background, Benchmarks & Best Practices. Measuring Usability LLC (2011).