with the display, but such arrangements would probably have improved both self-rated and measured performance. 7. Main conclusions. There was a large spread in the judgments; for many questions the whole 7-point scale was utilized. Thus there were visitors who "not at all agreed" or "strongly disagreed" with the positive statements, as well as visitors who "agreed very much" or "Strongly agreed". It should be noted that the present study was based on self-ratings of performance. Their relations to performance measured with objective methods are uncertain. Such measurements can provide both better and worse results. However, it is quite evident that the visitors in general found the experience of the haptic display amusing. High mean judgments were also obtained for questions about the instructiveness of the experience, and the positive judgments are in majority concerning the questions about "suggesting friends to visit" and "wanting similar devices in other museums". On the other side, the improvements suggested indicate that many visitors wanted to be able to more <strong>full</strong>y utilize the capacities of the haptic sense, especially to use larger parts of the hands. A haptic display with suitable such possibilities can be expected to be more satisfactory. This conclusion is strengthened by our own and others’ research mentioned above indicating the effects of constraints of the information in all present-day haptic displays. Concerning the use of the haptic display for aesthetic experience of objects of art it must be noted that aesthetic aspects have not been covered in this study. The participants’ tasks were to judge the experience of physical properties of the objects of art. A study of aesthetic aspects remains to be done. 8. References [1]. Bergamasco M., Le Musee del Formes Pures, 8th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interaction, RO-MAN 99, September 27-29 1999, Pisa, Italy. [2]. PURE-FORM. The MPF in Museums, Deliverable 14. 2004. PERCRO, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy. [3]. G. Jansson & L. Monaci, Haptic identification of objects with different numbers of fingers, in S. Ballesteros & M. A. Heller (Eds.), Touch, Blindness and Neuroscience, 2004, pp. 209-219. Madrid: UNED Press. [4]. G. Jansson & L. Monaci, Improvement of identification of objects with a haptic display: Increasing the information at each contact point is more efficient than increasing the number of contact areas Report in progress. [5]. S.J. Lederman, & R.L. Klatzky, R.L., Haptic identification of common objects: Effects of constraining the manual exploration process, Perception & Psychophysics, 2004, Vol. 66, pp. 618-628. Massimo Bergamasco / Application, Cultural heritage 78 [6]. A. Frisoli, F.Barbagli, S.-L. Wu, E. Ruffaldi, M Bergamasco & K. Salisbury, Evaluation of multipoint contact interfaces in haptic perception of shapes, 2004, Symposium of Multipoint Interaction, IEEE ICRA2004, Proc. [7]. P.K. Edman, Tactile graphics, 1992. New York: American Foundation for the Blind. [8]. G. Jansson, Can a haptic display rendering virtual 3D objects be useful for people with visual impairment?, Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 1999, Vol. 93, pp. 426- 429. [9]. G. Jansson, M. Bergamasco, & A. Frisoli, A new option for the visually impaired to experience 3D art at museums: Manual exploration of virtual copies, Visual Impairment Research, 2003, Vol. 5, pp. 1-12. [10]. Cruz-Neira C., Sandin D., Defanti T.:Surround-screen projection-based virtual reality:The design and implementation of thecave. ACM Proceedings of SIGGRAPH ’93(1993), 135-142. [11]. G. Jansson & A. Ivås, (2001). Can the efficiency of a haptic display be increased by short-time practice in exploration?, in G. Goos, J. Hartmanis & J. van Leeuwen (Series Eds.) & S. Brewster & R. Murray-Smith (Vol. Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 2058. Haptic Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 88-97. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. [12]. Frisoli A, Simoncini F, Bergamasco M., Mechanical Design of a Haptic Interface for the Hand" ", 2002 ASME International DETC- 27th Biennial Mechanisms and Robotics Conference , Montreal- Canada, September 29 - October 2, 2002 [13]. C.B. Zilles, J.K. Salisbury. A constraint-based godobject method for haptic display, in Proceedings of IROS 1995. [14]. E. Holmes & G. Jansson (1997), A touch tablet enhanced with synthetic speech as a display for visually impaired people’s reading of virtual maps, in CSUN 12th Annual Conference on Technology for People with Disabilities [3.5 diskette, file Holmes_e.txt]. Northridge, CA: California State University, Northridge. [15]. McLaughlin, M.L., Sukhatme, G., Shahabi, C. and Jaskowiak, J., The Haptic Museum, Proceedings of the EVA 2000 Conference on Electronic Imaging and the Visual Arts, Florence, Italy, March 2000. [16]. Bergamasco M. , Frisoli A., Barbagli F.,The Museum of Pure Form, Proc. of ICAR 2003, Coimbra-Portugal [17]. Buttolo P., Stewart P., Chen Y. "Force-Enabled Sculpting of CAD Models", Ford Research Laboratory, ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) IMECE2000, International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Orlando (Florida), November 2000. c The Eurographics Association 2005.
[18]. Gregory AD, Ehman SA, Ling MC, inTouch: Interactive Multiresolution Modeling and 3D Painting with a Haptic Interface, Proc. IEEE Virtual Reality Conference, 2000. c The Eurographics Association 2005. Massimo Bergamasco / Application, Cultural heritage 79
- Page 1 and 2:
EUROGRAPHICS 2005 Tutorial Multimod
- Page 3 and 4:
EUROGRAPHICS 2005 Tutorial Abstract
- Page 5 and 6:
ical velocities are estimated in ab
- Page 7 and 8:
LDOF# HDOF# VHDOF# Complexity Class
- Page 9 and 10:
Figure 5: The MORIS simulator Figur
- Page 11 and 12:
Contact Areas F 1 F2 Figure 10: The
- Page 13 and 14:
contact point, c we know that all t
- Page 15 and 16:
Figure 17: Anthropomorphic kinemati
- Page 17 and 18:
Thirdly, although the EFF is fully
- Page 19 and 20:
Figure 22: An example of arm trajec
- Page 21 and 22:
Figure 27: Differential tendon tens
- Page 23 and 24:
[16]. T. H. Massie and J. K. Salisb
- Page 25 and 26:
choice, when it is not requested to
- Page 27 and 28: Figure 4: The Dual point HI: GRAB d
- Page 29 and 30: Massimo Bergamasco / Haptic Interfa
- Page 31 and 32: In 1991, Wellner proposed for the f
- Page 33 and 34: number all over the workspace when
- Page 35 and 36: 6. EMPLOYMENT OF THE SYSTEM The dev
- Page 37 and 38: [23] Intuitive web site: www.intuit
- Page 39 and 40: formula, instead of a system of dif
- Page 41 and 42: Until a relative motion between the
- Page 43 and 44: force (kg), position (cm) 8 7 6 5 4
- Page 45 and 46: EUROGRAPHICS 2005 Tutorial A novel
- Page 47 and 48: G. Cini, A. Frisoli, S. Marcheschi,
- Page 49 and 50: G. Cini, A. Frisoli, S. Marcheschi,
- Page 51 and 52: G. Cini, A. Frisoli, S. Marcheschi,
- Page 53 and 54: Figure 1: Overview of the GRAB syst
- Page 55 and 56: actual position within the environm
- Page 57 and 58: training opportunities. During the
- Page 59 and 60: EUROGRAPHICS 2005 Tutorial 1. abstr
- Page 61 and 62: Table 1: Summary of GRAB features F
- Page 63 and 64: Table 3: Finger force vectors Symbo
- Page 65 and 66: the relative position did not match
- Page 67 and 68: operator’s arm allows assessing t
- Page 69 and 70: Figure 6: The pinching haptic inter
- Page 71 and 72: EUROGRAPHICS 2005 Tutorial Haptic D
- Page 73 and 74: contact area, while the collision d
- Page 75 and 76: 6.5. Results 6.5.1. Haptic experien
- Page 77: Familiarity with VR systems and wit
Change language