High-Resolution Usages By Robert Ball Original Image size:3628x2357 Courtesy of NASA.
-
Upload
cynthia-mclaughlin -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of High-Resolution Usages By Robert Ball Original Image size:3628x2357 Courtesy of NASA.
Overview
• Differences between large low-res. and large high-res.
• Different systems:– 3x3 (tiled lcd)– Gigapixel (tiled lcd)– Smart board (projection)– focus+context (lcd plus projection)– Viz Blocks (rear projection)
3x3 array
• My actual desktop• Resoltuion: 3840x3072 (typical 17” monitor: 1280x1024) • Cost about $5,000.00
• How would you like to program on this?
Gigapixel
• A gigapixel = 1,000,000,000 pixels!
• We currently have funding for a 0.2 gigapixel, or 200,000,000 pixels.
• A typical 17” monitor has 1,310,720 pixels.
• This thing is huge!
LCDs (Liquid Crystal Displays)
• Problems/limitations of LCDs?• What about CRTs (Cathode Ray Tube)? Going away for
good. Why?– Radiation, power guzzler, refresh rate (really bad for
your eyes), and space required.
Smart Board
• A rear project system that is large, but is low-res.
• Ideal for presentations and teaching.
Focus+Context Board
• Microsoft research created this.
• Combination of high and low resolution.
• Has a built-in LCD screen surrounded by a projection screen.
VisBlocks
• Rear Projection, high resolution• Costs $8,000 per block! Displayed is 20 blocks. That is
$160,000! • Dr. North is getting 12 in January. (You figure out the
math.)
Experiment
• Research Question: Are 9 monitors always better than 1 monitor with regard to performance time no matter what image density used?
• Participants: 36 people that were randomly selected.
• ANOVA and post-hoc contrast analysis.• Image density:
Model
• People in each group: The number of monitors was a with-in subject design and the data density was a between subject design):
• Latin Square:
Number of Monitors
One Four Nine
Small p1 - p12 p1 - p12 p1 - p12
Data Size Medium p13 - p24 p13 - p24 p13 - p24
Large p25 - p36 p25 - p36 p25 - p36
one four nine
four nine one
nine one four
My Results - QuatitativePerformance comparison (compare task)
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
Number of Monitors
Tim
e to
com
ple
te ta
sk (
in s
eco
nds
)
Small Dots 271.6 222.5 121.3
MediumDots
112.1 42.2 41.0
Large Dots 18.3 19.4 18.3
1 4 9
Performance comparison (f ind task)
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Number of Monitors
Tim
e to
com
plet
e ta
sk (
in s
econ
ds)
Small Dots 107.0 74.9 58.0
Medium Dots 9.6 9.1 12.4
Large Dots 5.4 5.0 5.5
1 4 9
My Results - Quanlitative
• People don’t like to use the mouse. They would prefer to just look at the data.
• Having very fine detail on just one monitor can make people frustrated, uncomfortable, and not convinced that there is even something to find.
• Not all monitors are looked at the same amount. It depends on your height!
Future Work - experiments
• Insight and task based experiment on comparing one high-resolution display of geospatial data to multiple low-resolution views of the same data.
• Comparing differing amounts of detail shown on visualizations and seeing who can get better performance time. Does the increased amount of detail detract from the overall structure?
• Comparing different visualizations of linked data for different monitor sizes.
• Comparing any of the above experiments on the 3x3 compared to the VisBlocks to see how bezels effect things.