High-Resolution Usages

By Robert Ball

Original Image size:3628x2357

Courtesy of NASA

Overview

• Differences between large low-res. and large high-res.

• Different systems:– 3x3 (tiled lcd)– Gigapixel (tiled lcd)– Smart board (projection)– focus+context (lcd plus projection)– Viz Blocks (rear projection)

3x3 array

• My actual desktop• Resoltuion: 3840x3072 (typical 17” monitor: 1280x1024) • Cost about $5,000.00

• How would you like to program on this?

Gigapixel

• A gigapixel = 1,000,000,000 pixels!

• We currently have funding for a 0.2 gigapixel, or 200,000,000 pixels.

• A typical 17” monitor has 1,310,720 pixels.

• This thing is huge!

LCDs (Liquid Crystal Displays)

• Problems/limitations of LCDs?• What about CRTs (Cathode Ray Tube)? Going away for

good. Why?– Radiation, power guzzler, refresh rate (really bad for

your eyes), and space required.

LCD or projection?

• Which one?

• Consider price and usage.

With Bezels: Without Bezels:

Smart Board

• A rear project system that is large, but is low-res.

• Ideal for presentations and teaching.

Focus+Context Board

• Microsoft research created this.

• Combination of high and low resolution.

• Has a built-in LCD screen surrounded by a projection screen.

VisBlocks

• Rear Projection, high resolution• Costs $8,000 per block! Displayed is 20 blocks. That is

$160,000! • Dr. North is getting 12 in January. (You figure out the

math.)

Experiment

• Research Question: Are 9 monitors always better than 1 monitor with regard to performance time no matter what image density used?

• Participants: 36 people that were randomly selected.

• ANOVA and post-hoc contrast analysis.• Image density:

Model

• People in each group: The number of monitors was a with-in subject design and the data density was a between subject design):

• Latin Square:

     Number of Monitors  

    One Four Nine

  Small p1 - p12 p1 - p12 p1 - p12

Data Size Medium p13 - p24 p13 - p24 p13 - p24

  Large p25 - p36 p25 - p36 p25 - p36

one four nine

four nine one

nine one four

My Results - QuatitativePerformance comparison (compare task)

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

Number of Monitors

Tim

e to

com

ple

te ta

sk (

in s

eco

nds

)

Small Dots 271.6 222.5 121.3

MediumDots

112.1 42.2 41.0

Large Dots 18.3 19.4 18.3

1 4 9

Performance comparison (f ind task)

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Number of Monitors

Tim

e to

com

plet

e ta

sk (

in s

econ

ds)

Small Dots 107.0 74.9 58.0

Medium Dots 9.6 9.1 12.4

Large Dots 5.4 5.0 5.5

1 4 9

My Results - Quanlitative

• People don’t like to use the mouse. They would prefer to just look at the data.

• Having very fine detail on just one monitor can make people frustrated, uncomfortable, and not convinced that there is even something to find.

• Not all monitors are looked at the same amount. It depends on your height!

Future Work - experiments

• Insight and task based experiment on comparing one high-resolution display of geospatial data to multiple low-resolution views of the same data.

• Comparing differing amounts of detail shown on visualizations and seeing who can get better performance time. Does the increased amount of detail detract from the overall structure?

• Comparing different visualizations of linked data for different monitor sizes.

• Comparing any of the above experiments on the 3x3 compared to the VisBlocks to see how bezels effect things.