Abstract
Mobile virtual reality (M-VR) uses an inexpensive and light headset into which the smartphone is inserted to conveniently experience immersive contents. Even so the headset is bulky and difficult to carry around, and makes the smartphone inaccessible. Recently, an alternative form of M-VR has appeared in the market in which the magnifying lenses are simply clipped on the smartphone (dubbed “EasyVR”). Despite being open and the user'speripheral view not shut from the outside world, it still gives a good level of immersion with a wide magnified field of view. EasyVR has the added advantages of quick switch between with the regular smartphone usage mode and access to the touch screen for the seamless interaction. In this paper, we examine and compare the level of presence and immersion as provided by three different display configurations of M-VR: (1) EasyVR, (2) the usual headset which completely isolates the user from the outer-world with the vignetted view (ClosedVR), and (3) completely open hand-held smartphone view (OpenVR). We also control the environment condition, static or dynamic, as seen and perceived through the peripheral view and possibly having an effect on the level of presence and immersion in the respective display configuration. Our findings first show the easily expected, namely, both ClosedVR and EasyVR clearly exhibiting a much higher level of presence and immersion than OpenVR. The results also show that even though there is a substantial extent within the peripheral view showing the outer environment, the level of presence and immersion of EasyVR is nearly comparable to that of ClosedVR. Only when the environment was dynamic (as visible in the peripheral view ends), EasyVR showed a lower level of presence and immersion than ClosedVR, but still significantly higher than OpenVR. Therefore, EasyVR is a very attractive alternative to the usual ClosedVR, especially as a “use-anywhere” VR considering its clearly improved convenience and sufficient level of immersion beyond just for casual purposes.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings - VRST 2017 |
| Subtitle of host publication | 23rd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology |
| Publisher | Association for Computing Machinery |
| Volume | Part F131944 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9781450355483 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2017 Nov 8 |
| Event | 23rd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, VRST 2017 - Gothenburg, Sweden Duration: 2017 Nov 8 → 2017 Nov 10 |
Other
| Other | 23rd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, VRST 2017 |
|---|---|
| Country | Sweden |
| City | Gothenburg |
| Period | 17/11/8 → 17/11/10 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Distraction
- Immersion
- Mobile virtual reality
- Open/closed VR display
- Presence
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Software
Cite this
Presence and immersion of “easy” mobile VR with open flip-on lenses. / Kim, Youngwon Ryan; Kim, Jeonghyun.
Proceedings - VRST 2017: 23rd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. Vol. Part F131944 Association for Computing Machinery, 2017. a38.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution
}
TY - GEN
T1 - Presence and immersion of “easy” mobile VR with open flip-on lenses
AU - Kim, Youngwon Ryan
AU - Kim, Jeonghyun
PY - 2017/11/8
Y1 - 2017/11/8
N2 - Mobile virtual reality (M-VR) uses an inexpensive and light headset into which the smartphone is inserted to conveniently experience immersive contents. Even so the headset is bulky and difficult to carry around, and makes the smartphone inaccessible. Recently, an alternative form of M-VR has appeared in the market in which the magnifying lenses are simply clipped on the smartphone (dubbed “EasyVR”). Despite being open and the user'speripheral view not shut from the outside world, it still gives a good level of immersion with a wide magnified field of view. EasyVR has the added advantages of quick switch between with the regular smartphone usage mode and access to the touch screen for the seamless interaction. In this paper, we examine and compare the level of presence and immersion as provided by three different display configurations of M-VR: (1) EasyVR, (2) the usual headset which completely isolates the user from the outer-world with the vignetted view (ClosedVR), and (3) completely open hand-held smartphone view (OpenVR). We also control the environment condition, static or dynamic, as seen and perceived through the peripheral view and possibly having an effect on the level of presence and immersion in the respective display configuration. Our findings first show the easily expected, namely, both ClosedVR and EasyVR clearly exhibiting a much higher level of presence and immersion than OpenVR. The results also show that even though there is a substantial extent within the peripheral view showing the outer environment, the level of presence and immersion of EasyVR is nearly comparable to that of ClosedVR. Only when the environment was dynamic (as visible in the peripheral view ends), EasyVR showed a lower level of presence and immersion than ClosedVR, but still significantly higher than OpenVR. Therefore, EasyVR is a very attractive alternative to the usual ClosedVR, especially as a “use-anywhere” VR considering its clearly improved convenience and sufficient level of immersion beyond just for casual purposes.
AB - Mobile virtual reality (M-VR) uses an inexpensive and light headset into which the smartphone is inserted to conveniently experience immersive contents. Even so the headset is bulky and difficult to carry around, and makes the smartphone inaccessible. Recently, an alternative form of M-VR has appeared in the market in which the magnifying lenses are simply clipped on the smartphone (dubbed “EasyVR”). Despite being open and the user'speripheral view not shut from the outside world, it still gives a good level of immersion with a wide magnified field of view. EasyVR has the added advantages of quick switch between with the regular smartphone usage mode and access to the touch screen for the seamless interaction. In this paper, we examine and compare the level of presence and immersion as provided by three different display configurations of M-VR: (1) EasyVR, (2) the usual headset which completely isolates the user from the outer-world with the vignetted view (ClosedVR), and (3) completely open hand-held smartphone view (OpenVR). We also control the environment condition, static or dynamic, as seen and perceived through the peripheral view and possibly having an effect on the level of presence and immersion in the respective display configuration. Our findings first show the easily expected, namely, both ClosedVR and EasyVR clearly exhibiting a much higher level of presence and immersion than OpenVR. The results also show that even though there is a substantial extent within the peripheral view showing the outer environment, the level of presence and immersion of EasyVR is nearly comparable to that of ClosedVR. Only when the environment was dynamic (as visible in the peripheral view ends), EasyVR showed a lower level of presence and immersion than ClosedVR, but still significantly higher than OpenVR. Therefore, EasyVR is a very attractive alternative to the usual ClosedVR, especially as a “use-anywhere” VR considering its clearly improved convenience and sufficient level of immersion beyond just for casual purposes.
KW - Distraction
KW - Immersion
KW - Mobile virtual reality
KW - Open/closed VR display
KW - Presence
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038558611&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85038558611&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/3139131.3139147
DO - 10.1145/3139131.3139147
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85038558611
VL - Part F131944
BT - Proceedings - VRST 2017
PB - Association for Computing Machinery
ER -