Hello:
The idea of a new Optacon does sound interesting. I do wonder if there
is as much need for an optacon since the advent of the KNFB reader. Maybe an
optacon could be attached to a KNFB Reader so the user could look at
characters the reader didn't recognize properly such as ligatures. A
ligature occurs when two letters appear to be joined together. For example,
the word return will sometimes be read as "retum". The letter r and letter n
can appear as an m. There is a device called the VideoTim that has a 16X16
array of pins and a hand held camera.
Regards,
Robert Jaquiss
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Andrews" <dandrews@visi.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nfb-rd@nfbcal.org>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 9:28 PM
Subject: New Optacon Contemplations
> People might be interested to read this message from Jim Bliss. The
> old-timers among us will know who he is -- the rest will just have to
> ask or wonder.
>
> David Andrews
>
>
>
>
>>Jim Bliss
>>New Optacon Design Ideas
>>
>>*by James C. Bliss*
>>
>>*1/26/09*
>>
>>* *
>>
>> The Optacon was designed in the late sixties at the dawn of
>>integrated circuits, silicon photocell arrays, and before microprocessors.
>>The
>>design was based on extensive experiments with human subjects, blind and
>>sighted, that used computer simulation of various designs to determine the
>>most effective for reading text.
>>
>>The final design incorporated a novel array of tactile stimulators
>>composed
>>of piezoelectric reeds, or bimorphs, a custom integrated array of silicon
>>photocells, and custom integrated circuits of shift register/bimorph
>>drivers.
>>
>> The custom integrated circuits and unique piezoelectric
>> reeds,
>>together with the small market, made the Optacon a difficult product to
>>source parts and manufacture. However, for those that mastered its use,
>>the
>>Optacon filled an essential need. Even though the Optacon has been out of
>>production for over fifteen years, there are still over 150 avid users
>>trying to maintain their Optacons and demanding a new Optacon.
>>
>> Now, almost 40 years after the original Optacon design,
>> advances
>>in technology make possible a new Optacon design that could have greater
>>resolution, be easier to learn and use, and could have features that would
>>greatly extend the applications of use.
>>
>> To reach the widest possible market, it is important to keep
>> the
>>simplicity of the original Optacon while enabling new capabilities and
>>applications. Below are my thoughts on design possibilities that could be
>>considered. Not all of these ideas may be worth developing, but
>>considering
>>them to assign priorities could help the process toward a new Optacon.
>>
>>I. Resolution and Field of View
>>
>> The original Optacon was designed around an array of 24 rows
>> and
>>6 columns of pixels that drove a corresponding array of 24 rows and 6
>>columns of bimorph tactile stimulators. The 24 by 6 was based on tests
>>with human subjects that indicated this was the minimum number of pixels
>>for
>>reading and tracking text at a practical speed. Actually, if you consider
>>24 pixels across a 0.1 inch letterspace, this is equivalent to only 240
>>dots/inch compared to the 300 dots/inch typically considered to be the
>>minimum needed for OCR. Also, the Optacon's 24 pixels across a 0.1 inch
>>letterspace is equivalent to a visual resolution of only 20/40.
>>
>> In addition, reading with an Optacon requires the user to
>> move
>>the hand held camera along a line of text. The limited field of view of
>>the
>>Optacon camera requires this scan to be very precise; else the images of
>>the
>>text are cut off. So reading would be easier and faster if the field of
>>view of a new design could be greater, thereby relaxing the precision
>>needed
>>for line tracking.
>>
>> Thus, for ease of tracking and reading a wider range of text
>>fonts and text quality, more pixels would certainly be better, analogous
>>to
>>the greatly enhanced picture quality resulting from the recent television
>>change from a 480 line interlaced scan to a 1080 progressive line scan.
>>
>> Fortunately, advances in technology make an improved
>> resolution
>>and field of view possible at a reasonable cost. Therefore, I believe
>>that
>>a goal of basing a new design on 36 vertical pixels to provide both
>>improved
>>resolution and greater field of view should be considered.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the Optacon II, which was designed by Canon,
>> had
>>only a 20 by 5 array. This reduction in resolution and field of view was
>>one of the reasons reading is more difficult with it.
>>
>> In the original Optacon design, the pixels were not square,
>> but
>>rectangles that were twice as wide as they were high. This is because
>>when
>>camera is moved along a horizontal line of text the letterspace is sampled
>>in the vertical direction, but an analog signal is obtained horizontally
>>across the letterspace. All of the image information can be obtained from
>>one column of pixels moved horizontally across the letterspace. However,
>>tests with human subjects clearly showed that reading accuracy increased
>>as
>>more columns were added.
>>
>> Based on these considerations, I suggest that a new design
>> have
>>12 columns across the same horizontal field of view as the original
>>Optacon.
>>Thus, the newly designed Optacon's pixels would be square, with the
>>vertical
>>and horizontal resolutions being the same. The 36 by 12 array would
>>increase the number of pixels to 432, compared to the 144 in the original
>>Optacon, perhaps justifying a name for the new model as "Optacon HD" for
>>"high definition".
>>
>>II. Tactile Array
>>
>> In the past 40 years, there have been some significant
>> advances
>>in piezoelectric materials. Several years
>>
>>ago there was a study at Stanford University that indicated the bimorph
>>reeds in the Optacon tactile array could be half as long as in the
>>original
>>design. This would allow incorporating the increased number of bimorphs
>>in
>>approximately the same space as before.
>>
>> A complaint about the Optacon has been the noise that it
>> makes.
>>This noise comes from the bimorphs, which are being driven by a 250Hz
>>square
>>wave, a frequency of maximum tactile sensitivity. This provides a strong
>>tactile sensation. The bimorph reeds were designed to be at near
>>resonance
>>at this frequency to consume a minimum amount of power from the battery.
>>After
>>the Optacon design was finalized and production had begun, we discovered
>>this noise was greatly reduced if the bimorphs are driven with a 250Hz
>>sine
>>wave instead of a square wave. This is because the human ear is much more
>>sensitive to the harmonics of a square wave than to the fundamental 250 Hz
>>frequency. However, we never had the opportunity to test whether there
>>was
>>any detrimental effect on the tactile sensation when a sine wave drive is
>>used instead of a square wave. In a new design this should be tested and
>>the sine wave used if desirable.
>>
>> At Telesensory the assembly of the tactile array was labor
>>intensive requiring considerable skill. Modern manufacturing techniques
>>including robotics could help reduce this cost.
>>
>>III. Retina Module
>>
>> When the Optacon was designed, no suitable integrated solid
>>state arrays of photocells were available, so a custom design was
>>developed
>>in the Stanford Laboratories. Finding and maintaining sources for this
>>custom part at the relatively low quantities needed made Optacon
>>production
>>difficult and expensive. Now integrated solid state arrays of photocells
>>are widely used in digital cameras, web cams, cell phones, etc. Thus in a
>>new design, a standard off-the-shelf part should be used if at all
>>possible.
>>
>>IV. Lens Modules
>>
>> The original Optacon lens is not a true zoom lens because
>> only
>>the lens is moved to change the magnification. This meant that the image
>>is
>>only in true focus at two points along the zoom range and out of focus at
>>the ends and middle of the zoom range. The amount of out of focus is
>>sufficiently small to not be a problem given the low resolution of the
>>original Optacon retina. Because of the increased resolution I'm
>>suggesting
>>in a new design, a better zoom system will be required. Actually, one of
>>the Optacon prototypes built at SRI and Stanford did have a zoom system
>>that
>>moved both the lens and the retina to keep the image in true focus. This
>>did not change the size of the camera and would not be a significant
>>increase in cost after tooling for production.
>>
>> Various lens modules, such as the typing attachment and CRT
>>screen module, were very important for the Optacon market because they
>>increased employment applications. While these particular accessory lens
>>modules are not as important today, others could be developed for
>>producing
>>handwriting, reading LCD screens, viewing and taking pictures at a
>>distance,
>>etc.
>>
>> In addition to image signals from the Optacon camera, an
>>independent signal indicating camera movement should be considered. While
>>sometimes this can be derived from the camera images, there may be
>>situations in which it may be desirable to have signals from the lens
>>module
>>rollers.
>>
>>V. Electronics
>>
>> Since the original Optacon was designed before
>> microprocessors,
>>the electronics did not include a microprocessor, however Optacon II did
>>and
>>any future designs most certainly would. In addition, a new design could
>>include some image storage as well as a port for an external memory
>>stick. This
>>would enable camera scans to be stored for later retrieval and/or further
>>processing on a PC.
>>
>> OCR and synthetic speech capability could be built into the
>>Optacon electronics. These capabilities, together with the storage
>>capability, means that the new design would need to have file handling and
>>other software built-in.
>>
>> A very important control on an Optacon is the threshold,
>> which
>>determines the photocell signal level between black and white. Especially
>>for poor quality print and for different colored print, how the threshold
>>is
>>set can determine whether the text is readable or not. For precision
>>threshold setting, I think this part of the circuitry should be analog
>>with
>>a high resolution potentiometer. Unfortunately, in Optacon II this
>>control
>>was digital with too few bits for precision.
>>
>> In addition to threshold and tactile stimulator intensity,
>> there
>>would need to be some additional controls, or buttons, similar to those on
>>a
>>"point and shoot" digital camera, for deleting images from storage,
>>cycling
>>through a menu, etc.
>>
>>VI. Ports
>>
>> A new design could have a port for the camera (possibly
>>wireless), a port for power (batteries could be charged in the Optacon or
>>on
>>a separate charging station), a port for a memory stick, and a USB port
>>for
>>sending camera images to a PC, for enabling the PC to write on the tactile
>>array, and for enabling new software to be installed in the Optacon.
>>
>>VII. Battery
>>
>> The Optacon II design was an improvement in battery
>> convenience
>>over the original Optacon and a new Optacon design could improve things
>>further. A system with readily available batteries that the user could
>>easily replace and charge should be the goal.
>>
>>VIII. Packaging
>>
>> The Optacon II design was an improvement in packaging over
>> the
>>original Optacon and a new Optacon design could improve things further.
>>
>>IX. PC Software for the Optacon
>>
>> By providing a new Optacon with a USB port where camera
>> images
>>can be transferred to a PC and the PC can write tactile images on the
>>Optacon means that the basic simplicity of the Optacon can be maintained
>>while providing the possibility of adding many new features for expanding
>>Optacon use. Some examples are:
>>
>> A. Optacon Reading Lessons and Speed Building
>>
>> Optacon training was essential in producing so many people
>> that
>>were successful in Optacon use. Teaching someone to use an Optacon
>>effectively was a labor intensive process. The most successful Optacon
>>training programs involved one teacher full time for every student for
>>several weeks. Since the seventies when these programs started, labor
>>costs
>>have dramatically increased relative to the cost of technology.
>>
>> However, with the widespread availability and increased
>>capability of PCs, it is now feasible to develop software that could
>>automate at least part of the training process. The PC could write
>>letters,
>>words, and text on the Optacon tactile screen, build speed by presenting
>>these at various rates, test student progress, and provide feedback
>>through
>>synthetic speech.
>>
>>B. Speech and Braille Output
>>
>> By OCR processing the images from scans from the Optacon
>> camera,
>>the PC could provide speech or Braille output. Several tactile
>>stimulators
>>could be combined to simulate a Braille dot on the Optacon's tactile
>>screen.
>>Speech and Braille files could be stored in the PC in addition to image
>>files.
>>
>>C. Optacon Screen Reader Software
>>
>> Optacon screen reader software could be developed in which
>>images from the PC screen were displayed on the Optacon tactile array.
>>The
>>PC mouse could be used to move the field of view of the tactile image
>>around
>>on the screen. This could be particularly useful in understanding screen
>>layout, viewing graphics on the screen, and in formatting documents.
>>
>>X. Conclusion
>>
>> I believe that developing and disseminating a new Optacon
>> along
>>the lines described here would significantly enhance the educational and
>>vocational opportunities, as well a personal independence, of blind people
>>around the world. I've described a design that would preserve the basic
>>simplicity of the original Optacon, greatly improve the quality of the
>>tactile image, and make tracking along a line of text easier. By adding
>>the
>>capabilities of memory storage and communication with a PC, new features
>>could be developed to make reading easier and faster through speech and
>>Braille, and that would expand Optacon applications. These design ideas
>>need to be evaluated by the blindness community.
>>
>> My guess is that the development of this basic Optacon alone
>>could cost several million dollars. (The PC software and other
>>accessories
>>could be developed later by third parties.) However, the relatively small
>>market coupled with the cost of development and the difficulties of
>>selling
>>to this market will discourage private companies from taking on such a
>>project. The situation is analogous to that with low incidence diseases
>>where biopharmaceutical companies don't develop treatments unless there is
>>some consideration such as "orphan drug status".
>>
>> The hope for bringing back a new Optacon might rest on
>> obtaining
>>grant support for development and dissemination from private foundations
>>or
>>government. For this to be viable would require strong support from the
>>blindness community and leadership from an organization with the
>>capability
>>of accomplishing the task.
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe from the Missouri-L list, send an email message to:
>>Missouri-l-request@MoBlind.org
>>with the word, unsubscribe in the subject field.
>>
>>Other email lists available from MCB include:
>>ATI - A general discussion of adaptive technology. To join, send a blank
>>EMail message to:
>>ATI-Join@MoBlind.Org
>>Chat - A general discussion list. Just about anything goes. To Join,
>>send
>>a blank EMail message to:
>>Chat-Join@MoBlind.Org
>>
>>Visit the MCB home Page at:
>>WWW.MoBlind.Org
>>
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG.
>>Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1916 - Release Date:
>>1/26/2009
>>7:08 AM
>>
>>
>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>Checked by AVG.
>>Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1916 - Release Date:
>>1/26/2009
>>7:08 AM
>>
>>
>>
>> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
>>Archived on the World Wide Web at
>> http://listserv.icors.org/archives/vicug-l.html
>> Signoff: vicug-l-unsubscribe-request@listserv.icors.org
>> Subscribe: vicug-l-subscribe-request@listserv.icors.org
>>
>>
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.13/1916 - Release Date:
>>1/26/2009 7:08 AM
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:04 PST