Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 53–63 | Cite as

Projector phone use: practices and social implications

Original Article


Phones with integrated pico projectors are starting to be marketed as devices for business presentations and media viewing, and researchers are beginning to design projection-specific applications and interaction techniques to explore a broader array of possible uses. To begin to document how people use projector phones outside the laboratory, we present the results of a 4-week exploratory field study of naturalistic use of commodity projector phones. In our analysis, we consider how context, such as group size, relationships, and locale, influences projector phone use. A key observation is that users can readily exploit the new facilities of these devices to author interesting effects by employing representational techniques such as superimposition, scaling, translation, and motion. Thus, even the “basic” projector phone platform affords novel interaction modalities. Finally, we discuss the social implications of projector phone use for privacy and control, extrapolating from our observations to envision a future in which these devices are ubiquitous. With ubiquity, projector phone use may become problematic in public settings, motivating new rules of etiquette and perhaps laws, yet it may also engender new forms of creative expression.


Projector phones Field study Social practices 



We thank Barry Brown for valuable feedback. This work has been funded by Microsoft Research ER&P, UC MICRO 07-067, and NSF Grant 0729013.


  1. 1.
    Anoto AB, Digital Pen and Paper technology.
  2. 2.
    BBC News (2008) ‘Intrusion’ warning over mini projectors.
  3. 3.
    Beardsley P, Forlines C, Raskar R, van Baar J (2005) Handheld projectors for mixing physical and digital textures. In: Proceedings of CVPR. p 112Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    von Bismarck J (2007/2008) Image fulgurator.
  5. 5.
    Blasko G, Coriand F, Feiner S (2005) Exploring interaction with a simulated wrist-worn projection display. In: Proceedings of Wearable computers, pp 2–9Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cao X, Balakrishnan R (2006) Interacting with dynamically defined information spaces using a handheld projector and a pen. In: Proceedings of UIST, pp 225–234Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cao X, Forlines C, Balakrishnan R (2007) Multi-user interaction using handheld projectors. In: Proceedings of UIST, pp 43–52Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cowan L, Griswold WG, Hollan JD (2010) Applications of projector phones for social computing. In: Ubiprojection workshop at PervasiveGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cowan L, Li K (2011) ShadowPuppets: supporting collocated interaction with mobile projector phones using hand shadows. In: Proceedings of CHI (in press)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cowan L, Weibel N, Pina L, Hollan JD, Griswold WG (2011) UbiSketch: bringing sketching out of the closet. Tech. Rep. CS2011-0962, University of California, San Diego, Computer Science DepartmentGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graffiti Research Lab: L.A.S.E.R. Tag.
  12. 12.
    Greaves A, Åkerman P, Rukzio E, Cheverst K, Häkkilä J (2009) Exploring user reaction to personal projection when used in shared public places: a formative study. In: CAM3SN Workshop at MobileHCIGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Greaves A, Rukzio E (2008) Evaluation of picture browsing using a projector phone. In: Proceedings of MobileHCI, pp 351–354Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greaves A, Rukzio E (2009) View & share: supporting copresent viewing and sharing of media using personal projection. In: Proceedings of MobileHCI, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harrison C, Tan D, Morris D (2010) Skinput: appropriating the body as an input surface. In: Proceedings of CHI, pp 453–462Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ito M, Okabe D, Matsuda M (2006) Personal, portable, pedestrian: mobile phones in Japanese life. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kane SK, Avrahami D, Wobbrock JO, Harrison B, Rea AD, Philipose M, LaMarca A (2009) Bonfire: a nomadic system for hybrid laptop-tabletop interaction. In: Proceedings of UIST, pp 129–138Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kindberg T, Spasojevic M, Fleck R, Sellen A (2005) The ubiquitous camera: an in-depth study of camera phone use. IEEE Pervasive Comput 42(2):42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Löchtefeld M, Schöning J, Rohs M, Krüger A (2009) Marauders light: replacing the wand with a mobile camera projector unit. In: Proceedings of MUM, pp 19:1–19:4Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luff P, Heath C (1998) Mobility in collaboration. In: Proceedings of CSCW, pp 305–314Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pico Projectors By Application, Technology & Products Market (2010–2014). Technical Report SE 1221, (2010)
  22. 22.
    Mistry P, Maes P, Chang L (2009) WUW- wear Ur world: a wearable gestural interface. In: Extended abstract. CHI, pp 4111–4116Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pinhanez CS (2001) The everywhere displays projector: a device to create ubiquitous graphical interfaces. In: Proceedings of UbicompGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Plant S (2001) On the mobile: the effects of mobile telephones on social and individual life. Motorola Media Centre Industry—Technical ReportGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rapp S, Michelitsch G, Osen M, Williams J, Barbisch M, Bohan R, Valsan Z, Emele M (2004) Spotlight navigation: interaction with a handheld projection device. In: Proceedings of Pervasive, video paper, pp 397–400Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Raskar R, Baar J, Beardsley P, Willwacher T, Rao S, Forlines C (2003) iLamps. ACM Trans Graph 22(3):809–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Raskar R, Beardsley P, Van Baar J, Wang Y, Dietz P, Lee J, Leigh D, Willwacher T (2004) RFIG lamps: interacting with a self-describing world via photosensing wireless tags and projectors. ACM Trans Graph 23(3):406–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rose M (2010) Photonics spectra, future projections: cell phone market poised for projectors. Photonics Media,
  29. 29.
    Scheible J, Ojala T (2009) MobiSpray: mobile phone as virtual spray can for painting BIG anytime anywhere on anything. Leonardo J Int Soc Arts Sci Technol 42(4):332–341Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Song H, Grossman T, Fitzmaurice G, Guimbretière F, Khan A, Attar R, Kurtenbach G (2009) PenLight: combining a mobile projector and a digital pen for dynamic visual overlay. In: Proceedings of CHI, pp 143–152Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Song H, Guimbretière F, Grossman T, Fitzmaurice G (2010) MouseLight: bimanual interactions on digital paper using a pen and a spatially-aware mobile projector. In: Proceedings of CHI, pp 2451–2460Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sugimoto M, Miyahara K, Inoue H, Tsunesada Y (2005) Hotaru: intuitive manipulation techniques for projected displays of mobile devices. In: Proceedings of INTERACT, pp 57–68Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Underkoffler J, Ullmer B, Ishii H (1999) Emancipated pixels: real-world graphics in the luminous room. In: Proceedings of CGIT, pp 385–392Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weibel N, Cowan LG, Pina LR, Griswold WG, Hollan JD (2010) Enabling social interactions through real-time sketch-based Communication. In: Adjunct proceedings of UISTGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wellner P (1993) Interacting with paper on the DigitalDesk. Commun ACM 36(7):87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Willis KDD, Poupyrev I (2010) MotionBeam: designing for movement with handheld projectors. In: Ext. Abstr. CHI, pp 3253–3258Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wilson ML, Robinson S, Craggs D, Brimble K, Jones M (2010) Pico-ing into the future of mobile projector phones. In: Ext. Abstr. CHI, pp 3997–4002Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science & EngineeringUniversity of California San DiegoLa JollaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Cognitive ScienceUniversity of California San DiegoLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations