“RFIG lamps: interacting with a self-describing world via photosensing wireless tags and projectors” by Raskar, Beardsley, van Baar, Wang, Dietz, et al. …

This paper describes how to instrument the physical world so that objects become self-describing, communicating their identity, geometry, and other information such as history or user annotation. The enabling technology is a wireless tag which acts as a radio frequency identity and geometry (RFIG) transponder. We show how addition of a photo-sensor to a wireless tag significantly extends its functionality to allow geometric operations – such as finding the 3D position of a tag, or detecting change in the shape of a tagged object. Tag data is presented to the user by direct projection using a handheld locale-aware mobile projector. We introduce a novel technique that we call interactive projection to allow a user to interact with projected information e.g. to navigate or update the projected information.The ideas are demonstrated using objects with active radio frequency (RF) tags. But the work was motivated by the advent of unpowered passive-RFID, a technology that promises to have significant impact in real-world applications. We discuss how our current prototypes could evolve to passive-RFID in the future.

1. ABELSON, H., ALLEN, D., COORE, D., HANSON, C., HOMSY, G., KNIGHT, T., NAGPAL, R., RAUCH, E., SUSSMAN, G., AND WEISS., R. 2000. Amorphous computing. In Communications of the ACM, vol. 43(5), 74–82. Google ScholarDigital Library
2. AZUMA, R., BAILLOT, Y., BEHRINGER, R., FEINER, S., JULIER, S., AND MACINTYRE, B. 2001. Recent Advances in Augmented Reality. In IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, vol. 21(6), 34–47. Google ScholarDigital Library
3. BEARDSLEY, P., RASKAR, R., FORLINES, C., AND VANBAAR, J. 2004. Interactive Projection. TR 2004/042, MERL.Google Scholar
4. BEARDSLEY, P., VANBAAR, J., AND RASKAR, R. 2004. Augmenting a Projector-Camera Device with Laser Pointers. TR 2004/035, MERL.Google Scholar
5. BIMBER, O., FROLICH, B., SCHMALSTIEG, D., AND ENCARNARO, L. M. 2001. The Virtual Showcase. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 21, 6, 48–55. Google ScholarDigital Library
6. CANESTA, 2002. Miniature Laser Projector Keyboard. http://www.canesta.com.Google Scholar
7. FISCHLER, M. A., AND BOLLES, R. C. 1981. Random Sample Consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with application to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun. Assoc. Comp. Mach. vol. 24, 381–95. Google ScholarDigital Library
8. FOXLIN, E., AND NAIMARK, M. 2002. Shadow Effects of Virtual Objects on Real Surfaces with a Handheld Projector. Unpublished.Google Scholar
9. HARTLEY, R., AND ZISSERMAN, A. 2000. Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
10. HINCKLEY, K., PIERCE, J., SINCLAR, M., AND HORVITZ, E. 2000. Sensing Techniques for Mobile Interaction. In ACM UIST CHI Letters, vol. 2(2), 91–100. Google ScholarDigital Library
11. HOLMQUIST, L. E., MATTERN, F., SCHIELE, B., ALAHUHTA, P., BEIGL, M., AND GELLERSEN, H.-W. 2001. Smart-Its Friends: A Technique for Users to Easily Establish Connections between Smart Artefacts. In Ubicomp, Springer-Verlag LNCS 2201, 273–291. Google ScholarDigital Library
12. LUMILEDS, 2003. (Bright LEDs). http://lumileds.com.Google Scholar
13. MA, H., AND PARADISO, J. A. 2002. The FindIT Flashlight: Responsive Tagging Based on Optically Triggered Microprocessor Wakeup. In Ubicomp, 160–167. Google ScholarDigital Library
14. MOORE, D. J., WANT, R., ANDET AL. 1999. Implementing Phicons: Combining Computer Vision with InfraRed Technology for Interactive Physical Icons. In Proceedings of ACM UIST’99, 67–68. Google ScholarDigital Library
15. NAYAR, S. K., PERI, H., GROSSBERG, M. D., AND BELHUMEUR, P. N. 2003. A Projection System with Radiometric Compensation for Screen Imperfections. In Proc. ICCV Workshop on Projector-Camera Systems (PROCAMS).Google Scholar
16. OMOJOLA, O., POST, E. R., HANCHER, M. D., MAGUIRE, Y., PAPPU, R., SCHONER, B., RUSSO, P. R., FLETCHER, R., AND GERSHENFELD, N. 2000. An installation of interactive furniture. In IBM Systems Journal, vol. 39(3,4). Google ScholarDigital Library
17. PATEL, S. N., AND ABOWD, G. D. 2003. A 2-Way Laser-Assisted Selection Scheme for Handhelds in a Physical Environment. In Ubicomp, 200–207.Google Scholar
18. PATTEN, J., ISHII, H., AND PANGARO, G. 2001. Sensetable: A Wireless Object Tracking Platform for Tangible User Interfaces. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (ACM CHI). Google ScholarDigital Library
19. PINHANEZ, C. 2001. The Everywhere Displays Projector: A Device to Create Ubiquitous Graphical Interfaces. In Ubiquitous Computing 2001 (Ubicomp’01). Google ScholarDigital Library
20. RASKAR, R., WELCH, G., AND FUCHS, H. 1998. Spatially Augmented Reality. In The First IEEE International Workshop on Augmented Reality (IWAR).Google Scholar
21. RASKAR, R., WELCH, G., LOW, K.-L., AND BANDYOPADHYAY, D. 2001. Shader Lamps: Animating Real Objects With Image-Based Illumination. In Rendering Techniques 2001, Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop in London, United Kingdom. Google ScholarDigital Library
22. RASKAR, R., VAN BAAR, J., BEARDSLEY, P., WILLWACHER, T., RAO, S., AND FORLINES, C. 2003. iLamps: Geometrically Aware and Self-configuring Projectors. ACM Trans. Graph. (SIGGRAPH) 22, 3, 809–818. Google ScholarDigital Library
23. REKIMOTO, J., ULLMER, B., AND OBA, H. 2001. DataTiles: A Modular Platform for Mixed Physical and Graphical Interactions. In CHI 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
24. RINGWALD, M. 2002. Spontaneous Interaction with Everyday Devices Using a PDA Workshop on Supporting Spontaneous Interaction in Ubiquitous Computing Settings. In UbiComp.Google Scholar
25. SIEMENS, 2002. Siemens Mini Beamer. http://w4.siemens.de/en2/html/press//newsdesk_archive/2002/foe02121b.html.Google Scholar
26. SYMBOL, 2002. Laser Projection Display. http://www.symbol.com/products/oem/lpd.html.Google Scholar
27. TELLER, S., CHEN, J., AND BALAKRISHNAN, H. 2003. Pervasive pose-aware applications and infrastructure. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications (Jul). Google ScholarDigital Library
28. THE COOLTOWN PROJECT, 2001. http://www.cooltown.com/research/.Google Scholar
29. UNDERKOFFLER, J., ULLMER, B., AND ISHII, H. 1999. Emancipated pixels: Real-world graphics in the luminous room. In Proc. Siggraph 99, ACM Press, 385–392. Google ScholarDigital Library
30. VERLINDEN, J. C., DE SMIT, A., PEETERS, A. W. J., AND VAN GELDEREN, M. H. 2003. Development of a Flexible Augmented Prototyping System. In The 11th International Conference in Central Europe on Computer Graphics, Visualization and Computer Vision’2003.Google Scholar
31. WANT, R., HOPPER, A., FALCO, V., AND GIBBONS, J. 1992. The Active Badge Location System. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 10, 1, 91–102. Google ScholarDigital Library
32. WANT, R., SCHILIT, B. N., ADAMS, N. I., GOLD, R., PETERSEN, K., GOLDBERG, D., ELLIS, J. R., AND WEISER, M. 1995. An Overview of the ParcTab Ubiquitous Computing Experiment. In IEEE Personal Communications, 28–43.Google Scholar
33. WANT, R., HARRISON, B. L., FISHKIN, K., AND GUJAR, A. 1999. Bridging Physical and Virtual Worlds with Electronic Tags. In ACM SIGCHI, 370–377. Google ScholarDigital Library
34. WANT, R. 2003. RFID, A Key to Automating Everything. In Scientific American, vol. 290(1), 56–65.Google ScholarCross Ref
35. ZHANG, Z. 1999. A Flexible New Technique for Camera Calibration. IEEE Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 22, 1330–1334. Google ScholarDigital Library