Evaluation of a Scanned

Laser Display as an
Alternative Low Vision
Computer Interface
Conor Kleweno, Eric Seibel, Ph.D., Kyle
Kloeckner, Bob Burstein, Erik Viirre, M.D.,
Ph.D., Thomas Furness III., Ph.D.

Problem Statement:

Can the Virtual Retinal Display (VRD)

be a helpful alternative low vision
computer interface
A testing protocol is needed to compare
the two interfaces for low vision use
1

Introduction:
Persons with low vision find computer use difficult with the
standard computer display (CRT)
A CRT is limited in brightness and contrast
Low vision aid software can make computer use
cumbersome
The VRD may be a better alternative for low vision
computer users
The VRD uses a modulated, low power laser that displays
an image directly onto retina using a two mirror scanning
mechanism

Objectives:
Design a testing protocol to compare the VRD
with a standard computer screen display (CRT)
Conduct vision tests with low vision subjects
with different low vision conditions
Determine if the VRD can be an effective
alternative low vision computer interface
Use an acuity test to compare visual acuity
between the VRD and a CRT

Objectives (continued):
Use a reading speed test to compare reading
performance between the VRD and a CRT
Determine what types of low vision benefit
from VRD technology
Have low vision subjects compare the quality
of images displayed between VRD and a CRT
in terms of clarity and brightness

Testing Site Setup:

Testing conducted in a controlled environment at the

Department of Services for the Blind
15 low vision subjects with variety of conditions
4

Four Test Conditions:

A standard CRT with white on black contrast
A standard CRT with red on black contrast
The VRD with red on black contrast with a
luminance setting of one half of the measured
value of the white on black CRT
The VRD with red on black contrast with a
luminance setting that matches the measured
value of the white on black CRT

Procedure:
CRT acuity test used the white on black contrast
VRD acuity test used the matched luminance setting
Reading speed tests conducted at four character
angle sizes
Three 20 second trials done at each character angle
size
Subjects given oral questionnaire to obtain
subjective data on clarity and brightness of images

Acuity Test:
Acuity tests conducted using the Landolt ring test
Pointer arrows were used to assist subject in
locating image
Acuity test range was 20/1128 to 20/67

Reading Speed Tests:

Three words shown simultaneously to subject on PowerPoint slides
as shown below
Subject manually advanced through slides and orally read the words
Unrelated words used
Reading speed evaluated as correctly read words per 20 second test
Box placed around words to help subject locate image

bird
her
state

Results: Reading Speed

60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60

All Subjects
Optical Causes
Retinal Causes

Mean Percent Improvement- Matched

Luminance VRD vs. White CRT
Mean Percent (%)

Mean Percent (%)

Mean Percent Improvement1/2 Luminance VRD vs. White CRT

3.15
1.88
1.22
0.74
Character Size in Degrees

-20.00
3.15

1.88

1.22

0.74

Character Size in Degrees

-20
-40
1.88

1.22

0.74

Mean Percent Improvement- Matched

Luminance VRD vs. Red CRT
Mean Percent (%)

Mean Percent (%)

All Subjects
Optical Causes
Retinal Causes

0.00

All Subjects
Optical Causes
Retinal Causes

Character Size in Degrees

60.00

20.00

20

3.15

Mean Percent Improvement1/2 Luminance VRD vs. Red CRT

40.00

40

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20

All Subjects
Optical Causes
Retinal Causes

3.15

1.88

1.22

0.74

Character Size in Degrees

Did the CRT or VRD Produce

Better Visual Acuity?
Same (3)
CRT (5)

Results:
Visual acuity
Which Display Was Perceptually Clearer?

Subjective responses
CRT (2)

Same (2)

VRD (10)

VRD (6)

Which Display Was Percptually Brighter?

Same (2)

CRT (1)

VRD (11)

10

Discussion:
VRD increased visual acuity and reading speed in some low vision
subjects
Overall, subjects with low vision conditions due to optical causes benefited
most from VRD
64% of subjects had equal or better visual acuity with the VRD
71% of subjects found VRD images clearer
79% of subjects found VRD images brighter
In general, subjects disliked red on black contrast
The testing protocol allowed a valid comparison between the two displays
More testing is planned to further define types of low vision that will benefit
from VRD

11

Acknowledgements:
Human Interface Technology (HIT) Lab
Howard Hughes Medical Scholar Summer Program
John Olson and the Washington State Department
of Services for the Blind, Seattle, Washington
National Science Foundation (Grant number DMI9801294)

12