skip to main content
research-article

The Revealing Flashlight: Interactive Spatial Augmented Reality for Detail Exploration of Cultural Heritage Artifacts

Published:01 June 2014Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Cultural heritage artifacts often contain details that are difficult to distinguish due to aging effects such as erosion. We propose the revealing flashlight, a new interaction and visualization technique in spatial augmented reality that helps to reveal the detail of such artifacts. We locally and interactively augment a physical artifact by projecting an expressive 3D visualization that highlights its features, based on an analysis of its previously acquired geometry at multiple scales. Our novel interaction technique simulates and improves the behavior of a flashlight: according to 6-degree-of-freedom input, we adjust the numerous parameters involved in the expressive visualization—in addition to specifying the location to be augmented. This makes advanced 3D analysis accessible to the greater public with an everyday gesture, by naturally combining the inspection of the real object and the virtual object in a colocated interaction and visualization space.

The revealing flashlight can be used by archeologists, for example, to help decipher inscriptions in eroded stones, or by museums to let visitors interactively discover the geometric details and meta-information of cultural artifacts. We confirm its effectiveness, ease of use, and ease of learning in an initial preliminary user study and by the feedback of two public exhibitions.

References

  1. Lucas Ammann, Pascal Barla, Xavier Granier, Gael Guennebaud, and Patrick Reuter. 2012. Surface relief analysis for illustrative shading. Computer Graphics Forum 31, 4 (June 2012), 1481--1490. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Samuel Audet, Masatoshi Okutomi, and Masayuki Tanaka. 2010. Direct image alignment of projector-camera systems with planar surfaces. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’10). 303--310.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Deepak Bandyopadhyay, Ramesh Raskar, and Henry Fuchs. 2001. Dynamic shader lamps: Painting on movable objects. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Augmented Reality. IEEE, 207--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Oliver Bimber, Franz Coriand, Alexander Kleppe, Erich Bruns, Stefanie Zollmann, and Tobias Langlotz. 2006. Superimposing pictorial artwork with projected imagery. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses. ACM, 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Oliver Bimber and Ramesh Raskar. 2005. Spatial Augmented Reality: Merging Real and Virtual Worlds. A. K. Peters, Ltd., Natick, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Gerd Bruder, Frank Steinicke, and Wolfgang Sturzlinger. 2013. To touch or not to touch?: comparing 2D touch and 3D mid-air interaction on stereoscopic tabletop surfaces. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (SUI'13). ACM, New York, NY, 9--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Géry Casiez, Nicolas Roussel, and Daniel Vogel. 2012. 1 Filter: A simple speed-based low-pass filter for noisy input in interactive systems. In Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’12). ACM, 2527--2530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Paolo Cignoni, Marco Callieri, Massimiliano Corsini, Matteo Dellepiane, Fabio Ganovelli, and Guido Ranzuglia. 2008. Meshlab: An open-source mesh processing tool. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Italian Chapter Conference. 129--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paolo Cignoni, Roberto Scopigno, and Marco Tarini. 2005. Technical section: A simple normal enhancement technique for interactive non-photorealistic renderings. Computer Graphics 29, 1 (Feb. 2005), 125--133. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Kenneth P. Fishkin. 2004. A taxonomy for and analysis of tangible interfaces. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8, 5 (2004), 347--358. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Ran Gal and Daniel Cohen-Or. 2006. Salient geometric features for partial shape matching and similarity. ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2006) 25, 1 (Jan. 2006), 130--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Jonathan Green, Tony Pridmore, and Steve Benford. 2013. Exploring attractions and exhibits with interactive flashlights. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing (2013), 1--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Gaël Guennebaud and Markus Gross. 2007. Algebraic point set surfaces. ACM Transaction on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2007) 26, 3 (July 2007), Article 23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Yves Guiard. 1987. Asymmetric Division of Labor in Human Skilled Bimanual Action: The Kinematic Chain as a Model. Available at http://cogprints.org/625/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Chris Harrison, Hrvoje Benko, and Andrew D Wilson. 2011. OmniTouch: Wearable multitouch interaction everywhere. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, 441--450. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Holly A. Hess. 2010. A biomedical device to improve pediatric vascular access success. Pediatric Nursing 36, 5 (2010), 259--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ken Hinckley, Randy Pausch, John C. Goble, and Neal F. Kassell. 1994. A survey of design issues in spatial input. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’94). ACM, 213--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer. 1997. Tangible bits: Towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In Proceedings of CHI. 234--241. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Shahram Izadi, David Kim, Otmar Hilliges, David Molyneaux, Richard Newcombe, Pushmeet Kohli, et al. 2011. KinectFusion: Real-time 3D reconstruction and interaction using a moving depth camera. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’11). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Brett R. Jones, Rajinder Sodhi, Roy H. Campbell, Guy Garnett, and Brian P. Bailey. 2010. Build your world and play in it: Interacting with surface particles on complex objects. In Proceeding of the 9th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR’10). IEEE, 165--174.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Michael Kolomenkin, Ilan Shimshoni, and Ayellet Tal. 2008. Demarcating curves for shape illustration. In ACM SIGGRAPH Asia 2008 Papers (SIGGRAPH Asia’08). ACM, Article 157, 9 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Michael Kolomenkin, Ilan Shimshoni, and Ayellet Tal. 2011. Prominent field for shape processing and analysis of archaeological artifacts. International Journal of Computer Vision 94, 1 (Aug. 2011), 89--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Taehee Lee and Tobias Hollerer. 2007. Handy AR: Markerless inspection of augmented reality objects using fingertip tracking. In Proceedings of the 2007 11th IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers. IEEE, 83--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Marc Levoy, Kari Pulli, Brian Curless, Szymon Rusinkiewicz, David Koller, Lucas Pereira, et al. 2000. The digital Michelangelo project: 3D scanning of large statues. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH’00). ACM/Addison-Wesley, 131--144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Tom Malzbender, Bennett Wilburn, Dan Gelb, and Bill Ambrisco. 2006. Surface enhancement using real-time photometric stereo and reflectance transformation. In Proceedings of the 17th Eurographics Conference on Rendering Techniques (EGSR’06). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Nicolas Mellado, Pascal Barla, Gaël Guennebaud, Patrick Reuter, and Christophe Schlick. 2012. Growing least squares for the continuous analysis of manifolds in scale-space. Computer Graphics Forum (July 2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Paul Milgram and Fumio Kishino. 1994. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems 77, 12 (1994), 1321--1329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Gavin Miller. 1994. Efficient algorithms for local and global accessibility shading. In SIGGRAPH’94. 319--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Mark R. Mine, Jeroen van Baar, A Grundhofer, David Rose, and Bei Yang. 2012. Projection-Based augmented reality in disney theme parks. Computer 45, 7 (2012), 32--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Pranav Mistry, Pattie Maes, and Liyan Chang. 2009. WUW-wear Ur world: A wearable gestural interface. In CHI’09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 4111--4116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Shree K. Nayar, Gurunandan Krishnan, Michael D. Grossberg, and Ramesh Raskar. 2006. Fast separation of direct and global components of a scene using high frequency illumination. ACM Transaction on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2006) 25, 3 (2006). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Yutaka Ohtake, Alexander Belyaev, and Hans-Peter Seidel. 2004. Ridge-valley lines on meshes via implicit surface fitting. ACM Transaction on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2004) 23, 3 (Aug. 2004), 609--612. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Mark Pauly, Richard Keiser, and Markus Gross. 2003. Multi-scale feature extraction on point-sampled surfaces. Computer Graphics Forum 22, 3 (2003), 281--289.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Bui Tuong Phong. 1975. Illumination for computer generated pictures. Communications of the ACM 18, 6 (June 1975), 311--317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Peter G. Polson, Clayton Lewis, John Rieman, and Cathleen Wharton. 1992. Cognitive walkthroughs: A method for theory-based evaluation of user interfaces. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 36, 5 (1992), 741--773. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch, and Henry Fuchs. 1998a. Seamless projection overlaps using image warping and intensity blending. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch, and Henry Fuchs. 1998b. Spatially augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Workshop on Augmented Reality (IWAR’98). 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Ramesh Raskar, Greg Welch, Kok-Lim Low, and Deepak Bandyopadhyay. 2001. Shader lamps: Animating real objects with image-based illumination. In Proceedings of the 12th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering Techniques. Springer-Verlag, 89--102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Maria Roussou and George Drettakis. 2003. Photorealism and non-photorealism in virtual heritage representation. In Proceedings of the 1st Eurographics Workshop on Graphics and Cultural Heritage (VAST’03), David B. Arnold, Alan Chalmers, and Franco Niccolucci (Eds.). Eurographics Association, 51--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Szymon Rusinkiewicz, Michael Burns, and Doug DeCarlo. 2006. Exaggerated shading for depicting shape and detail. ACM Transaction on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2006) 25, 3 (July 2006), 1199--1205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Munehiko Sato, Ivan Poupyrev, and Chris Harrison. 2012. Touché: Enhancing touch interaction on humans, screens, liquids, and everyday objects. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 483--492. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Johannes Schöning, Michael Rohs, Sven Kratz, Markus Löchtefeld, and Antonio Krüger. 2009. Map torchlight: A mobile augmented reality camera projector unit. In CHI’09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3841--3846. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Steven M. Seitz, Brian Curless, James Diebel, Daniel Scharstein, and Richard Szeliski. 2006. A comparison and evaluation of multi-view stereo reconstruction algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Volume 1 (CVPR’06). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 519--528. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Martin Spindler and Raimund Dachselt. 2009. PaperLens: Advanced magic lens interaction above the tabletop. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. ACM, 7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Jian Sun, Maks Ovsjanikov, and Leonidas Guibas. 2009. A concise and provably informative multi-scale signature based on heat diffusion. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Geometry Processing (SGP’09). 1383--1392. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Corey Toler-Franklin, Adam Finkelstein, and Szymon Rusinkiewicz. 2007. Illustration of complex real-world objects using images with normals. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering (NPAR). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Romain Vergne, Romain Pacanowski, Pascal Barla, Xavier Granier, and Christophe Schlick. 2010. Radiance scaling for versatile surface enhancement. In Proceedings of I3D 2010. 143--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Vassilios Vlahakis, Nikolaos Ioannidis, John Karigiannis, Manolis Tsotros, Michael Gounaris, Didier Stricker, et al. 2002. Archeoguide: An augmented reality guide for archaeological sites. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 22, 5 (Sept. 2002), 52--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Oliver Wang, Martin Fuchs, Christian Fuchs, James Davis, Hans-Peter Seidel, and Hendrik P. A. Lensch. 2010. A context-aware light source. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Photography.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Rony Zatzarinni, Ayellet Tal, and Ariel Shamir. 2009. Relief analysis and extraction. ACM Transaction on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2009) 28, 5, Article 136 (Dec. 2009), 9 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Revealing Flashlight: Interactive Spatial Augmented Reality for Detail Exploration of Cultural Heritage Artifacts

      Recommendations

      Reviews

      Anselm Grundhöfer

      For most people today, the term augmented reality (AR) is directly linked to cell-phone-based video augmentation applications. However, it should not be forgotten that other AR systems exist that augment the real world directly, such as projection-based spatial AR applications. Using well-established algorithms from computer vision and image processing, those systems can be used for various applications. The authors of this paper present the revealing flashlight, which is a novel visual interaction tool based on projection-based spatial augmented reality. This not only has the potential to enhance the attractiveness of cultural heritage artifacts, but can also be used as an inspection tool for archaeologists. Compared to similar methods, the presented approach offers electromagnetic and optical, finger-based interaction techniques and uses a pre-scanned, registered high-resolution geometry to generate the visual augmentations in a convincing fashion. Online Computing Reviews Service

      Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

      Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage
        Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage   Volume 7, Issue 2
        Special Issue on Interacting with the Past
        July 2014
        160 pages
        ISSN:1556-4673
        EISSN:1556-4711
        DOI:10.1145/2635823
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 1 June 2014
        • Accepted: 1 February 2014
        • Revised: 1 November 2013
        • Received: 1 July 2013
        Published in jocch Volume 7, Issue 2

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader