[Promotion-technology] New Optacon Contemplations

[Robert Jaquiss]

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 at visi.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nfb-rd at 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 at 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 at MoBlind.Org
>>Chat - A general discussion list.  Just about anything goes.  To Join, 
>>send
>>a blank EMail message to:
>>Chat-Join at 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 at listserv.icors.org
>>     Subscribe: vicug-l-subscribe-request at 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
>