Where Are the High-Res Head-Mounted Displays?

vivian writes "Ever since 1996, when I first set eyes on a Sony GlassTron head-mounted display in Japan, I have been awaiting a lightweight, head-mounted display that actually has decent resolution and doesn't look like a brick tied to your face. The closest contender to date seems to be the WRAP 920AV from Vuzix, and they are partially transparent too, which is great, but as with every other unit I have found, they only offer video quality — 640x480. Given that there have been a number of other discussions on Slashdot, I can't be the only one here who is eagerly awaiting something that could actually be a viable alternative to a PC monitor — especially for gaming or 3d graphics work. Perhaps we could petition a manufacturer to make what we actually want? Something with a minimum of 1024x768 @30-60hz refresh, say, and capable of stereo vision. Extra karma if they incorporate head tracking."

Comments

Kopin, as used by Mann

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.kopin.com/about-cyberdisplay/ (Tiny LCDs.)
http://wearcam.org/ (More complex than regular 'partially transparent' displays, but _far_ more capable - look up Mediated Reality / Augmented Reality.)

Re:VR was more hype than reality

[mikael_j]

I suggest googling "augmented reality" to get an idea of how what I mean, the purpose is to take video input (and other sources of input) and augmenting with information from say, a computer, before displaying it on a head-mounted display. Or say, to have an IR camera mounted on the HMD in addition to the regular cameras, thus making it possible to use that video input to "see in IR".

/Mikael

lasor pico projector

[alabandit]

my hopes lie here - hopefully HD in the release... http://www.microvision.com/pico_projector_displays/

DigiLens?

[vertinox]

Its not Hi-Res but its something people would wear more than some bulky goggles:

http://www.digilens.com/products.html

Its more for augmented reality than virtual reality.

Of course if you've a thousand dollars to blow there is always one of Emagin's products:

http://www.3dvisor.com/

Re:VR was more hype than reality

[apathyruiner]

I think that would be Back to the Future 2. IIRC the scene where old/crippled Marty gets fired.

Re:VR was more hype than reality

[Jaknet]

There was a short bit on BBC's Click (their "tech" news) a couple of weeks ago about a contact lens that is being built at the moment to give a visual overlay. So you could be nearer the mark than you think. It was not April the first either.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Right Here...

[cowtamer]

The PiSight HMD promises 187 degrees horizontal and 84 degrees vertical FOV by tiling DLP chips. I have yet to see it myself, but the units start somewhere around $20K and go up depending on how much FOV you want). 1900x1200 per eye (kind of low, but higher than anything out there).

The problem to solve with HMDs is not just field of view or resolution--you also need to solve the convergence and accommodation problems.

I envision a future HMD unit integrating eye tracking and auto focus which exploits the way the human eye really sees (few degrees at a time, in extremely high resolution) instead of trying to render a very high resolution image at interactive frame rates. I imagine the fact that this has not been built is due to the catch-22 involving low demand and high cost [when only the military can afford your hardware and is willing to pay for it, there is absolutely NO incentive to mass produce it]

In the meantime, the state of the art in VR is still in systems like the CAVE. I think the Iowa State VRAC CAVE has something amazing like 16 Mpixel resolution...

I am waiting for one of the game companies to start exploiting this. In the meantime, get yourself a pair of NuVision Cinema LCD shutter glasses (around $100), a $500 emitter, and a DLP 3DTV device for under $3000 if you are serious about home-based VR. If you can drive the 3DTV device (NVidia is releasing drivers for it ... there is also hardware available from RealD), the quality is stunning. (You're on your own with head tracking...but there are cheap solutions out there such as the WiiMote based hacks...I've only used the more expensive solutions).

I earn my living working on HMDs

[adam.sys]

I've been involved with wearable computers since 1994. Further, I have been designing and fabricating head mounted displays for an academic client who is highly regarded in the field of optics since 2004. To say I know something about this subject would be a coy understatement.

What is clear from reactions to all my previous demos is that people want a head mounted display that is inconspicuous, fits well, has high resolution, full color, wide field of view and produces a high quality image. Oh, yeah, it should be inexpensive as well. Because I've been working with world class optical experts, I know the physical reality of the optics. These criterion conspire against one another; improving one diminishes the others. So, one must prioritize these and do the best we can.
Here is one potential ranking:

1) unobtrusive
2) fits well
3) image quality
4) wide field of view
5) full color
6) inexpensive
7) high resolution

Your request for high resolution with acceptable field of view and image quality makes the unobtrusive criterion impossible with today's technology. This is unacceptable to the public at large.

I am working on a display system now that fits behind an ordinary looking pair of sunglasses. We have compromised resolution and, to some degree, field of view. I'm bound by a confidentiality agreement but I can tell you we are making advances with each successive project. The HMD is the last remaining barrier to a compelling wearable computer. One day your cell phone will be in your sunglasses.