Viewing meeting captured by an omni-directional camera

One vision of future technology is the ability to easily and inexpensively capture any group meeting that occurs, store it, and make it available for people to view anytime and anywhere on the network. One barrier to achieving this vision has been the design of low-cost camera systems that can capture important aspects of the meeting without needing a human camera operator. A promising solution that has emerged recently is omni-directional cameras that can capture a 360-degree video of the entire meeting. The panoramic capability provided by these cameras raises both new opportunities and new issues for the interfaces provided for post-meeting viewers — for example, do we show all meeting participants all the time or do we just show the person who is speaking, how much control do we provide to the end-user in selecting the view, and will providing this control distract them from their task. These are not just user interface issues, they also raise tradeoffs for the client-server systems used to deliver such content. They impact how much data needs to be stored on the disk, what computation can be done on the server vs. the client, and how much bandwidth is needed. We report on a rototype system built using an omni-directional camera and results from user studies of interface preferences expressed by viewers.

[1]  Anoop Gupta,et al.  Time-compression: systems concerns, usage, and benefits , 1999, CHI '99.

[2]  John C. Tang,et al.  Montage: providing teleproximity for distributed groups , 1994, CHI '94.

[3]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Tangible interfaces for remote collaboration and communication , 1998, CSCW '98.

[4]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  Remote Conversations: The Effects of Mediating Talk With Technology , 1995, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[5]  David Salesin,et al.  The virtual cinematographer: a paradigm for automatic real-time camera control and directing , 1996, SIGGRAPH.

[6]  Anoop Gupta,et al.  Comparing presentation summaries: slides vs. reading vs. listening , 2000, CHI.

[7]  John C. Tang,et al.  Liveboard: a large interactive display supporting group meetings, presentations, and remote collaboration , 1992, CHI.

[8]  Leysia Palen,et al.  “I'll get that off the audio”: a case study of salvaging multimedia meeting records , 1997, CHI.

[9]  Mi-Suen Lee,et al.  Segmentation, tracking and interpretation using panoramic video , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Workshop on Omnidirectional Vision (Cat. No.PR00704).

[10]  Steven McCanne,et al.  vic: a flexible framework for packet video , 1995, MULTIMEDIA '95.

[11]  Content based active video data acquisition via automated cameramen , 1998, Proceedings 1998 International Conference on Image Processing. ICIP98 (Cat. No.98CB36269).

[12]  Anoop Gupta,et al.  Designing presentations for on-demand viewing , 2000, CSCW '00.

[13]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Face detection with information-based maximum discrimination , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[14]  E. Riseman,et al.  Panoramic virtual stereo vision of cooperative mobile robots for localizing 3D moving objects , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Workshop on Omnidirectional Vision (Cat. No.PR00704).

[15]  Alexander H. Waibel,et al.  Modeling focus of attention for meeting indexing , 1999, MULTIMEDIA '99.

[16]  Sing Bing Kang,et al.  Catadioptric self-calibration , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662).

[17]  Zicheng Liu,et al.  Rapid modeling of animated faces from video , 2001, Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds.