3 ms·

It's cool, but I'm pretty sure I can flick through hundreds of photos much more efficiently with my mouse and keyboard (and without the tired shoulders). I thi

It's cool, but I'm pretty sure I can flick through hundreds of photos much more efficiently with my mouse and keyboard (and without the tired shoulders). I think gesture based interfaces may have some quick utility, like remotely operating equipment for small sequences of activities (gestures operating an Asimo comes to mind since it doesn't yet have a real input system like a mouse & keyboard -- come here, go there, stop, move aside, etc.) but I've yet to see a demo of this interface method, in this context, that isn't wildly less efficient than existing input methods.

rue 16y ago
More efficiently than the example or in "Minority Report"? Sure, even if a less-sophisticated computer user (such as a cop) might not. You cannot, however, use a mouse + keyboard faster than performing very small gestures mainly with fingers (as in, raise your hands from the keyboard and perform similar gestures).
- elblanco 16y ago
  I can hit the right arrow key on my keyboard hundreds of times a minute. Combined with a mousewheel for some spot checking and zooming, it only slows that down a hair. I'm an amateur photographer and after a week of taking photos I have thousands of photos I need to vet. This kind of gesture-based interface would take me until the universe grows cold to go through a single week's worth of shots. > Sure, even if a less-sophisticated computer user (such as a cop) might not. I'm not sure how learning a set of rather specific gestures is less complicated to a novice user than hitting the right arrow key or the spacebar a bunch of times (or clicking on a button labeled "next photo"). I've tried to use gesture based systems a number of times in the past and have always ended up just turning that feature off, mostly because I couldn't remember which one of a dozen gestures meant the particular thing I wanted to do. The idea is a nice one, use something that humans do all the time to build an intuitive interface, but the current state-of-the art doesn't understand normal human gestures very well. Why does two fingers vertically up mean "grab this" and not some other random gesture? In the end the problem is that we're trying to use arbitrary physical gestures, intended for a physical, 3-dimensional world, to interact with virtual objects in a 2-dimensional window, in ways that might not have any particular meaning to us as a form of normal gesturing (let alone cultural specific gestures, the number of different ways people do fairly universal gestures like point at something is mind-boggling). I don't think that there isn't any value in this work, I just think that the application that these interfaces are currently being designed for simply don't make any sense. Somebody else here mentioned that it might make a great deal of sense in 3d modeling sense mice-keyboard combinations are rather clumsy in that application. I happen to think using gestures as a control mechanism for robotics or machine operation might make more sense (imagine controlling a crane remotely by making appropriate hand open/close arm up/down gestures).
  - rue 16y ago
    I agree with you that the composer-style arm flailing is not great (even if intuitive to non-techies), but I do consider smaller, closer-proximity gestures a perfectly viable direction of research. > I'm not sure how learning a set of rather specific gestures is less complicated to a novice user than hitting the right arrow key or the spacebar a bunch of times (or clicking on a button labeled "next photo"). They are just not as good with traditional computer input methods, negating the advantage that you or I would gain there. The point about 3D is very good, and something that can be workable even with 2D displays (in a "3D" environment, like your average FPS). Rotating, pulling things from "behind" something else etc. For certain categories of use, it is probably better than voice commands - another natural UI for humans - in the same way some of us still prefer the CLI over a GUI. The current technology obviously is not quite there, but it is already possible to implement a virtual keyboard by observing finger movements. Combine that with gestures performed above the virtual surface, and you might have something.
eagleal 16y ago
Am I the only one who is thrilled more about the depth capturing and projection than the UI applications? Since I don't own a holographic projector I just posted some images and videos of recent relevant Kinect hacks on my blog http://www.pmura.com/blog/2010/11/the-underestimated-power-of-devices-like-kinect http://www.pmura.com/blog/2010/11/the-underestimated-power-o...
tassl 16y ago
It was also way more efficient to drive a horse than any of the first cars. The key here is not this precise application but the technology that it implies.

rue 16y ago

More efficiently than the example or in "Minority Report"? Sure, even if a less-sophisticated computer user (such as a cop) might not. You cannot, however, use a mouse + keyboard faster than performing very small gestures mainly with fingers (as in, raise your hands from the keyboard and perform similar gestures).

elblanco 16y ago
I can hit the right arrow key on my keyboard hundreds of times a minute. Combined with a mousewheel for some spot checking and zooming, it only slows that down a hair. I'm an amateur photographer and after a week of taking photos I have thousands of photos I need to vet. This kind of gesture-based interface would take me until the universe grows cold to go through a single week's worth of shots. > Sure, even if a less-sophisticated computer user (such as a cop) might not. I'm not sure how learning a set of rather specific gestures is less complicated to a novice user than hitting the right arrow key or the spacebar a bunch of times (or clicking on a button labeled "next photo"). I've tried to use gesture based systems a number of times in the past and have always ended up just turning that feature off, mostly because I couldn't remember which one of a dozen gestures meant the particular thing I wanted to do. The idea is a nice one, use something that humans do all the time to build an intuitive interface, but the current state-of-the art doesn't understand normal human gestures very well. Why does two fingers vertically up mean "grab this" and not some other random gesture? In the end the problem is that we're trying to use arbitrary physical gestures, intended for a physical, 3-dimensional world, to interact with virtual objects in a 2-dimensional window, in ways that might not have any particular meaning to us as a form of normal gesturing (let alone cultural specific gestures, the number of different ways people do fairly universal gestures like point at something is mind-boggling). I don't think that there isn't any value in this work, I just think that the application that these interfaces are currently being designed for simply don't make any sense. Somebody else here mentioned that it might make a great deal of sense in 3d modeling sense mice-keyboard combinations are rather clumsy in that application. I happen to think using gestures as a control mechanism for robotics or machine operation might make more sense (imagine controlling a crane remotely by making appropriate hand open/close arm up/down gestures).
- rue 16y ago
  I agree with you that the composer-style arm flailing is not great (even if intuitive to non-techies), but I do consider smaller, closer-proximity gestures a perfectly viable direction of research. > I'm not sure how learning a set of rather specific gestures is less complicated to a novice user than hitting the right arrow key or the spacebar a bunch of times (or clicking on a button labeled "next photo"). They are just not as good with traditional computer input methods, negating the advantage that you or I would gain there. The point about 3D is very good, and something that can be workable even with 2D displays (in a "3D" environment, like your average FPS). Rotating, pulling things from "behind" something else etc. For certain categories of use, it is probably better than voice commands - another natural UI for humans - in the same way some of us still prefer the CLI over a GUI. The current technology obviously is not quite there, but it is already possible to implement a virtual keyboard by observing finger movements. Combine that with gestures performed above the virtual surface, and you might have something.

eagleal 16y ago

Am I the only one who is thrilled more about the depth capturing and projection than the UI applications? Since I don't own a holographic projector I just posted some images and videos of recent relevant Kinect hacks on my blog http://www.pmura.com/blog/2010/11/the-underestimated-power-of-devices-like-kinect http://www.pmura.com/blog/2010/11/the-underestimated-power-o...

tassl 16y ago

It was also way more efficient to drive a horse than any of the first cars. The key here is not this precise application but the technology that it implies.