skip to main content
10.1145/358916.358935acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

The effects of filtered video on awareness and privacy

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 December 2000Publication History

ABSTRACT

Video-based media spaces are designed to support casual interaction between intimate collaborators. Yet transmitting video is fraught with privacy concerns. Some researchers suggest that the video stream be filtered to mask out potentially sensitive information. While a variety of filtering techniques exist, they have not been evaluated for how well they safeguard privacy.

In this paper, we analyze how a blur and a pixelize video filter might impact both awareness and privacy in a media space. Each filter is considered at nine different levels of fidelity, ranging from heavily applied filter levels that mask almost all information, to lightly applied filters that reveal almost everything. We examined how well observers of several filtered video scenes extract particular awareness cues: the number of actors; their posture (moving, standing, seated); their gender; the visible objects (basic to detailed); and how available people look (their busyness, seriousness and approachability). We also examined the privacy-preserving potential of each filter level in the context of common workplace activities. Our results suggest that the blur filter, and to a lesser extent the pixelize filter, have a level suitable for providing awareness information while safeguarding privacy.

References

  1. 1.Bellotti, V. (1996) What you don't know can hurt you: Privacy in collaborative computing. Proc HCI'96 Conference on People and Computers XI, 241-261, Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.Buxton, W. (1997) Living in augmented reality: Ubiquitous media and reactive environments. In K. Finn, A. Sellen and S. Wilbur (eds) Video Mediated Communication, Hillsdale, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Cockburn, A. and Greenberg, S. (1993) Making contact: Getting the group communicating with groupware. In Proc ACM COOCS'93, 31-41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.Crowley, J. Coutaz, J., and Berard, F. (2000) Things that see. Commun. ACM, 43(3), 54-64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.Deriche, R. (1990) Fast algorithms for low-level vision. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 12(1), 78-87, January. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Dourish, P. and Bly, S. (1992) Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed work group. Proc ACM CHI'92, 541-547. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Gaver, W., Moran, T., MacLean, A., L~vstrand, L., Dourish, P., Carter, K and Buxton, W. (1992). Realizing a video environment: EuroPARC's RAVE system. Proc ACM CHI'92, 27-34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.Greenberg, S. and Kuzuoka, H. (2000). Using digital but physical surrogates to mediate awareness, communication and privacy in media spaces. Personal Technologies, 4(1), January, Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.Harper, R. (1995) Why people do and don't wear active badges. CSCW Journal, 4(4), p297-318 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Hudson, S. and Smith, I. (1996) Techniques for addressing fundamental privacy and disruption tradeoffs in awareness support systems. Proc ACM CSCW'96, 248-257. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.Kraut, R., Egido, C. and Galegher, J. (1988) Patterns of contact and communication in scientific collaboration. Proc ACM CSCW'88, 1-12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.Kuzuoka, H. and Greenberg, S. (1999) Mediating awareness and communication through digital but physical surrogates. ACM CHI'99 Video Proceedings and Conference Extended Abstracts. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.Lee, A., Girgensohn, A. and Schlueter, K. (1997) NYNEX Portholes: Initial user reactions and redesign implications issues in technology supporting learning. Proc ACM GROUP'97, 385-394 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.Tang, J., Isaacs, E. and Rua, M. (1994) Supporting distributed groups with a Montage of lightweight interactions. Proc ACM CSCW'94, 23-34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.Zhao, Q. and Stasko, J. (1998) Evaluating image filtering based techniques in media space applications. Proc ACM CSCW'98,11-18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The effects of filtered video on awareness and privacy

                      Recommendations

                      Comments

                      Login options

                      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                      Sign in
                      • Published in

                        cover image ACM Conferences
                        CSCW '00: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
                        December 2000
                        346 pages
                        ISBN:1581132220
                        DOI:10.1145/358916

                        Copyright © 2000 ACM

                        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                        Publisher

                        Association for Computing Machinery

                        New York, NY, United States

                        Publication History

                        • Published: 1 December 2000

                        Permissions

                        Request permissions about this article.

                        Request Permissions

                        Check for updates

                        Qualifiers

                        • Article

                        Acceptance Rates

                        CSCW '00 Paper Acceptance Rate36of199submissions,18%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

                        Upcoming Conference

                        CSCW '24

                      PDF Format

                      View or Download as a PDF file.

                      PDF

                      eReader

                      View online with eReader.

                      eReader