Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Tracing and Sketching Performance using Blunt-tipped Styli on Direct-Touch Tablets

Presentation at ACM AVI 2014 on our evaluation of tracing and sketching using blunt-tipped styli on direct-touch tablets. Presented by Sriram Karthik Badam.

  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Tracing and Sketching Performance using Blunt-tipped Styli on Direct-Touch Tablets

  1. 1. Tracing and Sketching Performance using Blunt-tipped Styli on Direct-Touch Tablets Sriram Karthik Badam, Senthil Chandrasegaran Niklas Elmqvist, Karthik Ramani
  2. 2. Tablet computers: transitioning from paper 2
  3. 3. Digital medium: content creation 3
  4. 4. Digital design medium Dedicated Mobile 4
  5. 5. Finger Input 5
  6. 6. Digital design input styli * 6
  7. 7. The Designer’s Notebook 7
  8. 8. Typical product design Sketch primitives Develop a model from primitives Improve quality by tracing over Can digital design tools replace paper for this? 8
  9. 9. Aspects of direct-touch sketching friction occlusion parallax familiarity 9
  10. 10. Related Work Accot and Zhai (1999) Zabramski et al. (2011) 10
  11. 11. Study 14 participants (13 male, 1 female) 3 medium + input multiple shapes 2 tasks Tracing Sketching 11
  12. 12. Tracing x 3 repetitions • Time taken for each trace • Failures to keep to the tunnel • Questionnaire x 3 media 12
  13. 13. What’s better? Tracing speed Fast to Slow * 7.27 sec 7.69 sec 8.58 sec 13 * significant with p-value <= .05
  14. 14. What’s better? Tracing failures Least to Most 3 20 84 14
  15. 15. Tracing task - survey Comfortable Confident Accurate 14 14 14 12 10 10 5 2 1 15
  16. 16. Sketching x 3 repetitions x 3 medium • Sketch Quality – Crowdsourced voting! • Questionnaire A B C D 16
  17. 17. What’s better? Sketch quality High to Low * * significant with p-value <= 0.05 17
  18. 18. Comfortable Confident Accurate 14 14 14 9 8 7 9 8 3 Sketching task - survey 18
  19. 19. Aspects Familiarity (self reported) occlusion friction parallax different* pen-paper different than tablet pen-paper different than tablet < < > < = 19
  20. 20. Findings Tracing speed Tracing failures (fewer) Sketch quality of cubes Sketch quality of cylinders * * * * * (*) significantly better performance than the unmarked media -----------------------------same--------------------------- 20
  21. 21. Blunt tipped vs. Sharp tipped styli 21
  22. 22. Follow-up 6 participants (5 male, 1 female) 2 medium + input multiple shapes 2 tasks Tracing Sketching 22
  23. 23. Data collection • Time taken for each trace • Failures to keep to the tunnel • Sketch Quality – expert voting (4 independent judges)! Tracing (5 shapes) Sketching (3 shapes) • Questionnaire • Questionnaire 23
  24. 24. What’s better? Tracing speed Fast to Slow 7.59 sec 7.71 sec 24
  25. 25. What’s better? Tracing failures Least to Most 11 15 25
  26. 26. Tracing task - survey Comfortable Confident Accurate 5 3 2 4 5 5 26
  27. 27. What’s better? Sketch quality High to Low • Sketches drawn with hard-tipped stylus were chosen three times more frequently 27
  28. 28. Sketching task - survey Comfortable Confident Accurate 5 4 2 3 3 4 28
  29. 29. Aspects familiarity occlusion friction parallax = > different* = 29
  30. 30. Findings Tracing speed Tracing failures (fewer) Sketches * (*) sketches selected three times more frequently 30
  31. 31. The Designer’s Notebook 31
  32. 32. Implications Case for blunt-tip stylus 32
  33. 33. IIS-1227639 IIS-1249229 IIS-1253863 Donald W. Feddersen Chaired Professorship Purdue School of Mechanical Engineering. Acknowledgment Questions? S. Karthik Badam sbadam@purdue.edu 33

×