Geospatial Visualization in Place


Published on

Presentation by Mark Billinghurst at the 7th International Symposium on the Digital Earth (ISDE7) conference (, on how Augmented Reality can be used to provide Geospatial Visualization in Place.

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Geospatial Visualization in Place

  1. 1. Geospatial Visualization In Place: New Opportunities with Augmented Reality Mark Billinghurst HIT Lab NZ University of Canterbury
  2. 2. Christchurch Earthquakes
  3. 3. Christchurch Before and After
  4. 4.   Professional solutions available   Autodesk REVIST, ESRI ArcGIS, Grass,etc
  5. 5. Emerging Novel User Interfaces  Stereo Visualization  Multi-touch screens  Smartphones
  6. 6. VisionSpaceNext Generation Immersive Visualization
  7. 7. GeoSpatial Data
  8. 8. Limitations  Complex interfaces  Unintuitive interaction  2D display for 3D content  Separation from the real world  Remote visualization
  9. 9. Augmented Reality (Azuma 97)  Combines Real and Virtual Images -  Both can be seen at the same time  Interactive in real-time -  The virtual content can be interacted with  Registered in 3D -  Virtual objects appear fixed in space
  10. 10. Augmented Reality Examples  Put AR pictures here
  11. 11. AR and Geospatial Visualization  Enhanced Maps   AR overlay on printed material  Outdoor AR   In place visualization  Mobile AR  Sensor Visualization   Sensor data shown in place
  12. 12. AR Markerless Tracking  OPIRA Library   Uses natural features for tracking   Fast, robust performance
  13. 13. Interactive AR Maps  Markerless tracking  3D model overlay  Gesture input
  14. 14. Outdoor AR  Highly accurate outdoor AR tracking system   GPS, Inertial, RTK system   HMD  First prototype   Laptop based   2-3 cm accuracy
  15. 15. Image RegistrationAR Stakeout Application
  16. 16. Mobile AR - Hardware GPS Example self-built working Antenna solution with PCI-based 3D graphics PCI 3D Graphics Board Tracker Controller PC104 Sound Card DC to DC Wearable Converter CPU Computer PC104 PCMCIA Battery GPS RTK Hard Drive correction Radio Serial PortsColumbia Touring Machine
  17. 17. 2008 - Location Aware PhonesMotorola Droid Nokia Navigator
  18. 18. Real World Information Overlay  Tag real world locations   GPS + Compass input   Overlay graphics data on live video  Applications   Travel guide, Advertising, etc  Eg: Mobilizy Wikitude   Android based, Public API released  Other companies   Layar, AcrossAir, Tochnidot, RobotVision, etc
  19. 19. Layar –  iPhone, Android  > 2 million downloads  1500+ information layers
  20. 20. HIT Lab NZ Outdoor AR Platform  Cross platform   Android, iPhone  3D onsite visualization   Intuitive user interface  Positions content in space   Camera, GPS, compass  Client/Server software architecture  Targeting museum guide/outdoor site applications
  21. 21. Prototype: Earthquake Reconstruction  See past, present and future building designs  Earthquake survivor stories shown on map view  Collect user comments  Android platform
  22. 22. Client/Server Architecture Web Interface Add models Web application java and php server Android application Database server Postgres
  23. 23. Hydrosys Project (TU Graz)  Smart Earth visualization  Sensor network  Handheld AR display
  24. 24. AR View
  25. 25. Hydrosys Interface
  26. 26. Looking to the Future
  27. 27. Research Directions  User Interface  Wide Area Tracking  Information Filtering  Application Evaluation  Social Networking
  28. 28. AR Navigation  Many commercial AR browsers   Information in place   How to navigate to POI
  29. 29. 2D vs. AR Navigation? VS
  30. 30. AR Navigation Study  Users navigate between Points of Interest  Three conditions   AR: Using only an AR view   2D-map: Using only a top down 2D map view   AR+2D-map: Using both an AR and 2D map view  Experiment Measures   Quantitative -  Time taken, Distance travelled   Qualitative -  Experimenter observations, Navigation behavior, Interviews -  User surveys, workload (NASA TLX)
  31. 31. HIT Lab NZ Test Platform – AR View
  32. 32. HIT Lab NZ Platform – Map View
  33. 33. Distance and TimeNo significant differences
  34. 34. Paths Travelled   Red – AR   Blue – AR + Map   Yellow - Map
  35. 35. Navigation Behaviour   Depends on interface   Map doesn’t show short cuts
  36. 36. Survey Responses
  37. 37. User Comments  AR   “you dont know exactly where you are all of the time.”   “using AR I found it difficult to see where I was going”  Map   “you were able to get a sense of where you were”   “you are actually able to see the physical objects around you”  AR+MAP   “I used the map at the beginning to understand where the buildings were and the AR between each point”   “You can choose a direction with AR and find the shortest way using the map.”
  38. 38. Usability Issues  Screen readability in sunlight  GPS inaccuracies  Compass errors  Touch screen difficulties  No routing information
  39. 39. Lessons Learned  User adapt navigation behaviour to guide type   AR interface shows shortcuts   Map interface good for planning  Include map view in AR interface   2D exocentric, and 3D egocentric  Allow people to easily change between views   May use Map far away, AR close  Difficult to accurately show depth
  40. 40. Conclusions•  AR allows for GeoSpatial Visualization in Place•  Hardware and software platforms widely available•  Many possible applications/commercial possibilities•  Important research problems need to be solved – Wide area tracking – User experience – Information presentation/filtering – Etc..
  41. 41. More Information•  Mark Billinghurst – •  Website –