5 ms·

Not at all true. For that to work, there would have to be, yes, eye tracking and a lot of image processing to change where your gaze appeared to be, but also kn

Not at all true. For that to work, there would have to be, yes, eye tracking and a lot of image processing to change where your gaze appeared to be, but also knowledge of the physical size of the screen, the location of that particular person's feed on the screen, and where the screen is in relation to the camera. Now, it's possible that a lot of that could be inferred if it's assumed the screen is not moved in relation to the camera, and a lot of work went into tracking window locations even as you move things around, but that's a LOT of effort to expend for such a minor feature (let alone the uncanny valley effect if you don't get the image processing perfect, including the transitional "eye moved from the document you were looking at, to looking at them" - the software would have to somehow note that rather than just looking over an inch, you actually looked up 7 inches, and render that realistically). Easiest way to confirm this is not true, though (rather than just describe the challenge involved) - have a Zoom/Teams/whatever call 1-on-1. As you're talking to the person, and they're talking back to you, note where their eyes are. 95% of the time they're going to be below where your eyes would "meet", i.e., the camera is at the top of their monitor/laptop, and they're looking at you on screen. In fact, I've had some people -never- 'meet' my gaze, because they never become self-aware enough to "oh, I should look at my camera when I am talking".

vladvasiliu 5y ago
> In fact, I've had some people -never- 'meet' my gaze, because they never become self-aware enough to "oh, I should look at my camera when I am talking". I'm not sure that looking into the camera is that important in a one-to-one setting. I'm specifically not talking about a "broadcast", like when you address an assembly and the communication is expected to go both ways. To me, the reason why we look at a person when talking together is to see their reactions, and for them to see ours. Even in real life, and in particular when we speak, we don't look at the other person's eyes 100% of the time. So in the case of video chat, where the "eyes" (the camera) is completely separate from the face, looking into the eyes cuts you off from their reaction, as you'll only see it in your peripheral vision. However, even if you see their eyes never meet yours, you're able to infer whether they're looking at your video or reading something else. And the most important part, their reactions, is still there. To me, the whole point of video chat, as opposed to a phone call, is to have this additional channel of communication. If you're not looking at the person with whom you're talking, you might as well not use video at all.
- lostcolony 5y ago
  Yeah, I didn't mean to imply looking at the camera to meet the person's gaze is the "right" thing to do, or expected, or any such thing. Just that I've had times where I've thought "My video shows me looking down; I should probably look at the camera to give the appearance of eye contact".
itronitron 5y ago
This video shows a project to create a one-way mirror that allows a person to view their monitor while 'looking at' the camera. https://youtu.be/2AecAXinars https://youtu.be/2AecAXinars If I was planning to do any interviews I would definitely build and use this. It also makes me wonder, when people are staring into the camera if they are looking at a photo instead of the camera lens.
bongoman37 5y ago
This doesn't even account for the number of people who have multimonitor setups and no particular connection between camera position and where the call window might be.
nickjj 5y ago
> oh, I should look at my camera when I am talking I'm not a really outgoing person but when I talk in real life I'm one of those people who tend to look into someone's eyes a lot when talking and listening, probably 97% eye contact from my end if I had to guess. It feels very weird not to do this but looking into the webcam is much worse for me because you can't see the other person at the same time. I haven't figured out why I prefer eye contact, but I wonder if it has to do with being able to see what the other person is doing and how they're reacting to the conversation. You can pick up a lot of information when looking at someone's face.

vladvasiliu 5y ago

> In fact, I've had some people -never- 'meet' my gaze, because they never become self-aware enough to "oh, I should look at my camera when I am talking". I'm not sure that looking into the camera is that important in a one-to-one setting. I'm specifically not talking about a "broadcast", like when you address an assembly and the communication is expected to go both ways. To me, the reason why we look at a person when talking together is to see their reactions, and for them to see ours. Even in real life, and in particular when we speak, we don't look at the other person's eyes 100% of the time. So in the case of video chat, where the "eyes" (the camera) is completely separate from the face, looking into the eyes cuts you off from their reaction, as you'll only see it in your peripheral vision. However, even if you see their eyes never meet yours, you're able to infer whether they're looking at your video or reading something else. And the most important part, their reactions, is still there. To me, the whole point of video chat, as opposed to a phone call, is to have this additional channel of communication. If you're not looking at the person with whom you're talking, you might as well not use video at all.

lostcolony 5y ago
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply looking at the camera to meet the person's gaze is the "right" thing to do, or expected, or any such thing. Just that I've had times where I've thought "My video shows me looking down; I should probably look at the camera to give the appearance of eye contact".

itronitron 5y ago

This video shows a project to create a one-way mirror that allows a person to view their monitor while 'looking at' the camera. https://youtu.be/2AecAXinars https://youtu.be/2AecAXinars If I was planning to do any interviews I would definitely build and use this. It also makes me wonder, when people are staring into the camera if they are looking at a photo instead of the camera lens.

bongoman37 5y ago

This doesn't even account for the number of people who have multimonitor setups and no particular connection between camera position and where the call window might be.

nickjj 5y ago

> oh, I should look at my camera when I am talking I'm not a really outgoing person but when I talk in real life I'm one of those people who tend to look into someone's eyes a lot when talking and listening, probably 97% eye contact from my end if I had to guess. It feels very weird not to do this but looking into the webcam is much worse for me because you can't see the other person at the same time. I haven't figured out why I prefer eye contact, but I wonder if it has to do with being able to see what the other person is doing and how they're reacting to the conversation. You can pick up a lot of information when looking at someone's face.