Slashdot Mirror

3d headset for under $1,000.

Add some LEDS and the Wii controller will be able to do 3d tracking, or just throw a couple accelerometers on it.

Quake is open source, just code in to render two scenes from two different POVs and put them together into some acceptable 3d format.

Voila, quake in fully immersive 3d. Personally I'd like to add separate aiming and viewing so I don't always have to shoot in the center. This is only necessary if you are holding a gun that's being tracked as well.

http://corporate.discovery.com/discovery-news/discovery-communications-sony-and-imax-announce-pl/

Yep - a 24/7 fully dedicated 3D network in the US.

I think 3D is an epic fail right out of the gate. Autostereoscopy has been on the market already, so the whole add glasses thing is idiotic.

Samsung showed it at this year's CES, but it didn't get the big exposure... but still, it's out there:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1379458976&play=1

Autostereoscopic info here (one example) - meaning, 3D without glasses:

http://www.xyz3d.tv/

In addition - 3D headsets with 1.44 megapixel/eye glasses have been out for some time. All it would take would be a few minor upgrades, and for about a grand, you'd have the equivalent of a 3D 70" set at 13'. See, for example:

http://www.i-glassesstore.com/ig-hrvpro.html

Oh - and wait for it - the Blu-ray kiddies have decided that the correct term is now 3-D, not 3D, unless it is.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3924

A note on spelling

Earlier this year, the blu-ray.com team unanimously decided to use the spelling "3-D", with a hyphen, for everything related to stereoscopic images, and "3D", without a hyphen, for three-dimensional graphics and animation. We shall continue to do so, except when citing the name of the "Blu-ray 3D" specification, which doesn't use the hyphen.

OBTW - Did we all notice that the proposed tech is going to eat an additional 50% of bandwidth? For those suffering from compression/decompression artifacting - read: for everyone with digital cable or satellite HD - it's going to get worse as the 3D premiums are added. Woot!

I loved David Pogue's view (amusing as always) on 3D TV in his Truth Serum video.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1386497920&play=1

Let's not forget - the Avatar craze was with circularly polarized PASSIVE GLASSES - not Bluetooth'd active shutters!

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/164200,3d-tv-buzz-at-ces-2010-just-another-gimmick-or-should-you-hang-onto-those-avatar-glasses.aspx

I think this is a simple case of **I AM** ready for 3D-D ... ready to wait until it dies or makes sense!

BTW - Let's not forget Johnny Lee's head-tracking system (if you watch nothing else - watch this!!) - at least that was cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Then you want these:
http://www.i-glassesstore.com/i-glasses-i3pc.html
800x600!

Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that in 1992 (yes, that's 17 years ago) you could buy the Virtual-IO I-Glasses for $900, and they were 320x240 (claimed 640x480 with scan line interpolation).

Apparently, 17 years is exactly enough time to increase the resolution from 320x240 to 800x600. Hm.

Some articles (from 1998) would claim that defect density is the main problem in high resolution LARGE displays:

from: http://www.ausairpower.net/OSR-0398.html
"
As is evident, the high cost of current AM TFT LCD panels is a direct result of very complex fabrication processes, which may produce often poor batch yields. The bigger the panel and its number of pixels, the greater the odds that a processing defect will occur rendering a pixel or row/column of pixels dead and thus resulting in an expensive and useless reject.
"

So... would the logic then extend to smaller LCD panels being EASIER to make in higher resolutions? It seems reasonable. However, if that's the case, why isn't the market full of high resolution small LCD panels that can be used to make these $900 into $100 units that everyone could be using instead of massive LCD monitors?

But the stereoscopic googles are out there. http://www.i-glassesstore.com/ig-hrvpro.html This would be cool with a couple of small cameras outside the goggles, so you can overlay your view with data. I could see a whole new kind of video game, where you play out in the real world with things nobody else can see (except fellow players) of course you'd look schizophrenic, buy hey, that'd be half the fun.

1. Cross-link Facebook, Slashdot, Twitter, Second Life, Google Earth
2. Create detailed 3D body model for all Slashdotters
3. Render 3D models to latex masks.
4. Render 3D models to simulated virtual environment
5. Capture, drug and equip Slashdotters with goggles
6. Replace real-world Slashdotters with robot duplicates.
7. Profit!

Linux runs on just about anything, these days, and if it doesn't, NetBSD does.

Get an ipod that can run IPodLinux, plug in one of these, and a pair of these, and you'll be ready to dodge bullets. ;-)

With the above, they can sell as many of their crippled, gimped notebooks as they want; you can use that stuff and the hacked ipod to create your own system. If you don't mind the weight, there's still this old trick, too.

Microsoft can do whatever they want. All we need to do is route around them.

Stop being afraid of them; they have no power. We can do whatever we like, and there is nothing they can do about it...for the simple reason that there are so many more of us. Microsoft are only one company.

As to how feasible it is to get the Mac-based drivers to work on Ubuntu, you've got me there. I'm not familiar enough with the differences between the two OSes at that level (networking geek, not a programmer).

Displays in our eyeglasses sounds pretty tame compared to Vernor Vinge or Ray Kurzweil.
    http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0518.html?printable=1
"Vernor Vinge's Hugo-award-winning short science fiction story "Fast Times at Fairmont High" takes place in a near future in which everyone lives in a ubiquitous, wireless, networked world using wearable computers and contacts or glasses on which computer graphics are projected to create an augmented reality."

Hans Moravec was talking about "magic glasses" in the 1980s,
  http://www.gslis.utexas.edu/~palmquis/courses/reviews/erin.htm
and you can buy variants of them today
    http://www.i-glassesstore.com/
(not quite heads-up, but it is not much of a stretch I've seen prototypes for those, likely even on Slashdot).

If magic glasses was "sci fi" I can imagine why Peter Norton left in disgust. Many people have a real difficulty understanding the nature of exponential growth in technological capacity. See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_change
Or:
    http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0134.html?printable=1
"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense "intuitive linear" view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century -- it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity -- technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."

I'll get a portable video player when it outputs to totally immersive glasses. I just hope I don't get mugged while being totally immersed. :) http://www.i-glassesstore.com/hmds.html

I beleave VR is still very much everyone's dream. I see more products now inching closer to affordable VR. Like IR sensors for hats to track head movement.

I've personaly cobbled together a kind of entry level system I use to play games like Republic Commando and Star Wars Galaxies with. It's not the greatest as resolution is far from what you get on a monitor. And text, small ones, sometime become hard to read. But I am happy with it.

Head Tracker (actualy taped to the headphones):
http://www.gyration.com/ultragt-compact.htm

Surround Sound:
http://www.zalman.co.kr/eng/product/view.asp?idx=1 10&code=023

Head Mounted Display ($500 off eBay, although my are an older version I think)
http://www.i-glassesstore.com/iglassespc-3d.html

There are a number of improvements to the setup which could be made with some electrical engineering type skills. Which I don't have, but it's to play with none the less.

So VR isn't forgotton, I just don't think it's really gotton to the point yet where the manufacturers see enough of a profit window to come up with complete systems.

With this new iPod Apple could target movie downloaders. The most common format for a movie is mpeg4-encoded file. A 700MB file containing 1.5 hour movie looks not much worse than DVD on TV screen; and if you spread it over 2 CDs it's almost DVD quality. You can fit almost 100 movies on 60GB hard drive.

Now, many of newer DVD players today can play mpeg4 movies encoded with popular codecs such as DivX and Xvid.

So, iPod will have video-out? Great news. It should alsom inclode those codecs and a player (QuickTime?) to become a portable video device!

You could download collection of movies from you PC on 60GB drive and go visit friends or maybe go on holiday... And play movies anywhere where there is a TV. Apple could grab a hude chunk of market from DVD players...

And then, if you get one of those ridiculous video goggles on... Who needs a TV or a cinema?

No, not 'cheap' as in value menu, 'cheap' as getting a new car for $10k would be. Nice cellphones go for about $130 these days. If these prices remain similar with the new resolution, let's say a VGA phone is like $200. Even if the screen is the most expensive, it can be reliably said that you could do a dual LCD HMD w/o headtracking for around $600. This is 'cheap' for an HMD that would seem to you to be >50" screen.

I have been thinking this would be perfect for laptops. I would much rather have a nice set of glasses, however dorky, that I can use on a plane with my laptop. Complete privacy, and no loss (but a gain!) of screen real estate. How about a laptop that doesn't even have a screen? Extreme? Yes, but that would be fine for 90% of my on-the-go type of work.

I even met a dork wanna-be yesterday, so let's face it, with cellphones, pda's, gbas and the like becoming ever more popular, it's become chic to be dork. :)

Although there are some inexpensive HMDs available, it seems like driver support has been the hugest issue. I don't even *want* 3D stuff, like two independent displays, just make it so I can get rid of these LCDs.

Oh, and btw, can someone show me any HMDs on Linux? Any?

I'm not a potential rapist, but I do want one of those funky pirate hats. Hell, maybe even an eyepatch.

Here are the data pirate versions of the funky hat and eyepatch that you are looking for.

Do you mean something like these?

I haven't RTFA, but I'm dubious about this claim. There simply isn't enough information in a 2D image to construct a 3D image.

If there were, your brain would already do it (and, in fact, already does to a limited extent).

I don't see how computer technology is going to improve on what your brain can already do.

A virtual keyboard like this one would make a great accessory for that . Maybe even glasses like these . I know what I want for christmas !

Combine this device (with a few upgrades) with Wearable displays + This Jacket (maybe an upgrade or two + a computer that speaks sign language + Pervasive wireless broadband and I am starting to get to my "comfort level" for internet access. No longer will I have to wait during my whole commute of 5 minutes to check for the next Slashdot story. No more shaking internet withdrawl on the bus!!

You couldn't match the focal lengths and focus with off the shelf cameras, so the images would'nt align.

There is a good attatchment for a standard video camera, the Nu-view

I bought 2, it works great, good quality product.

Seeing this guy wearing his clunky "Video I-glasses" made me wonder why these never caught on.*

>Yes, but it costs more than this projector.

No, it doesn't.

i-O displays will sell you an HMD with XGA resoltion for between $1k and $2k (IIRC -- they don't have this model for sale right now). They have an SVGA unit for under $700 right now, if you don't need the resolution.