Slashdot Mirror
Vrvana's Totem HMD Puts a Camera Over Each Eye
The Verge reports that Montreal startup Vrvana has produced a prototype of its promised (and crowd-funded) VR Totem headset. One interesting aspect of the Totem is the inclusion of front-facing cameras, one over each eye, the output of which can be fed to the displays.
Reviewer Mike Futter has worn a prototype, and seems to be generally impressed, writing at Game Informer:
Vrvana’s device offers 1080p resolution and features 90-degree field of view (the same as the Project Morpheus, but less than the Oculus Rift's 100-degree FOV), an OLED display, and adjustable lenses that can compensate for lens prescription. The HMD is usable by glasses wearers, but the tuning provides an option for those that don't want to wear corrective lenses while in VR. The system connects via HDMI to any source, and can model 3D (side-by-side) from game consoles as virtual reality right now. The Totem is currently compatible with all Oculus developer kit 1 applications, and Vrvana is working on getting DK2 experiences working. The prototype I wore was a good proof of concept, but didn't yet feature the OLED screen. This led to increased persistence due to the LCD. The head tracking also wasn't perfect, requiring some software tuning to prevent drift (something easily surmountable down the road). The clarity was impressive, rivaling some of the best experiences I've had with a Rift or Morpheus.
and called it macaronni
The problem still with these VR goggles is that my eyes want to adjust its focus on stuff that is nearby, and want to have a distant focal point when stuff is far away.
The danger is of course that when using these goggles often, my eyes may "unlearn" their focus behavior.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Anyone know what the FOV of a human is?
I assume that moving your eyes while wearing a headset doesn't work, instead, you have to move your whole head. So the FOV ought to be that of a human who is only looking forward. Increasing or decreasing the FOV would surely create dis-orientation for the user.
Now where does this system put a camera over each eye? Poster seems to be confused about what a camera and what a display is.
Gargoyles represent the embarrassing side of the Central Intelligence Corporation. Instead of using laptops, they wear their computers on their bodies, broken up into separate modules that hang on the waist, on the back, on the headset. They serve as human surveillance devices, recording everything that happens around them. Nothing looks stupider; these getups are the modern-day equivalent of the slide-rule scabbard or the calculator pouch on the belt, marking the user as belonging to a class that is at once above and far below human society. They are a boon to Hiro because they embody the worst stereotype of the CIC stringer. They draw all the attention. The payoff for this self-imposed ostracism is that you can be in the Metaverse all the time, and gather intelligence all the time.
You can buy LED strips (and fancier kits) to stick behind your TV/monitor to create a coloured glow on the wall around your screen which extends the edges of the images to create a greater immersion.
Given that screen-size is the limiting factor in these VR headsets, are any of the manufacturers including this kind of ultra-simple peripheral lighting within the headset? To reduce the blinker effect from the limited FOV.
TV/monitor kits can only use the regular image and extrapolate the edge effects. But with a VR kit, the content developers themselves would be able to program peripheral lighting in addition to the monitor image. So an object could appear in your peripheral vision before it reaches the edge of the actual screen. Similarly, small and large objects would show differences in the peripheral lighting even though both have the same size on the screen. Both effects increasing the immersion. (And, of course, in horror games, the devs would use it to just fuck with you.)
IMO, with a peripheral lighting system, a screen with a mere 90 FOV would be plenty for full immersion. It's rare that you pivot your eyes beyond 45 without turning your head. You flick your eyes across, then turn your head to re-centre your vision. And when you do that, your eyes don't have long enough to focus on the object (to extract detail) before your head movement has caught up, so under normal circumstances you still shouldn't notice the extremely low resolution of the peripheral lighting.
[Disclaimer: I ain't even got a Nintendo Virtual Boy, so maybe modern VR devices all do this, but I can't find any reference to it online except a single 5 year old forum post.]
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Fur-suiting folks have a big problem with vision. You're usually looking out through mesh fabric, often recessed and colored. Your vision is limited and peripheral vision is almost nonexistent. And that's if your fursona (furry persona) is a predator species. If your character is a prey species, your eyes aren't in the right place, which looks odd. A system (which could be hacked) that provides a camera-and-display for each eye would let one mount the cameras where your line of sight should be and allow the mask to have eyes in the proper place.
Ahem
You were saying?
Since when is war not homicide?
Huff post is owned by Aol.
Maybe you want Avegant's "DLP" styled VR goggles?
http://beta.slashdot.org/submission/3111611/hands-on-with-avegants-impressive-virtual-retinal-head-mounted-display
"adjustable lenses that can compensate for lens prescription."
"The HMD is usable by glasses wearers, but the tuning provides an option for those that don't want to wear corrective lenses while in VR"
This can only accomodate spherical prescriptions. For astigmatism, you're still going to need glasses. Unless they do something like the Televue does with it's telescope eyepieces and let you buy separate cylindrical lenses as an add-on.
Kickstarter begin 3 days be Occulus announced their Crescent Bay which has vastly improved resolution. I have a DK2 and as immersive as it is, the resolution is definitely an issue, and this is the same resolution as the Vrvana one. The cameras are nice though- the ability to switch between the 2 is useful. The only other thing that would be a god-send would be a 2d->3d button for when a 2d image is sent to the vr headset which you are required to see, but due to lens cannot.
Such systems have existed for years if you wanted to DIY. I assume no one uses them because they'd add heat and weight and would eventually need to be recharged. If you wanted to spend some money, you could even do it with two action cams and a cell phone. You don't need 'fancy' eye-tracking or an advanced head mount to make it work.
I had a fine HUD for a robot using an X11 camera and an Eyetop over 8 years ago. Hobby RC airplanes having been doing similar things even longer, dating back to at least the 90s. I really wished people would take a moment to look at tech history instead of believing all the marketing lies that say they're the first to do things. I haven't seen anything new in a long time, advancements in hardware are only making things cheaper and smaller; it already existed and isn't new. Taking something that already exists and remaking it with the next iteration in hardware isn't innovative or cool, it's a minor step.