Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ...
on
3D Monitor
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This probably is not a function of rods and cones. It might be caused by the chromatic aberation of your eye. Like a prism blue light is bent more than red light by the eye. Because of this the optimal power for your lens different for different color light. And since the eyes have different refractive powers it causes each eye to have a different color with a better focus.
There are two components to how people use the focus cue for depth perception. There is the blur gradient, that is how things in front of and behind your point of focus get blurier. There is also your eye muscles physical accommodation to this depth. Research seems to indicate that the blur gradient is not as important as the eye's accomodative depth. The depth of focus is a really hard thing to simulate on a display. You can try to use a measure of gaze direction, but to stop people from getting uncomfortable the lag needs to be reduced to almost zero. So you effectively need many depth planes you can project onto.
As for holographic displays, one of the problems with them, or any volumetric display, is that there is no occlusion in the scene. This really limits the quality and usefulness of this method.
Napsters new lawyer has argued in his opposition to the RIAA's motion for preliminary injunction that noncommercial digital copying of a copyrighted work by a consumer is legal.
This argument is based on The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 which amended the Copyright Act of 1976 and added, among other things: "No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."
This seems like an answer to Sen. Hatch's questions about what is fair use. Just as long as it's noncommercial go ahead and copy to your hearts content.
Double jeopardy does not apply to civil trials. So the RIAA is free to sue napster again for copyright infringment even if the first suit is thrown out because of the misuse clause.
Slashdot Mirror
This probably is not a function of rods and cones. It might be caused by the chromatic aberation of your eye. Like a prism blue light is bent more than red light by the eye. Because of this the optimal power for your lens different for different color light. And since the eyes have different refractive powers it causes each eye to have a different color with a better focus.
There are two components to how people use the focus cue for depth perception. There is the blur gradient, that is how things in front of and behind your point of focus get blurier. There is also your eye muscles physical accommodation to this depth. Research seems to indicate that the blur gradient is not as important as the eye's accomodative depth. The depth of focus is a really hard thing to simulate on a display. You can try to use a measure of gaze direction, but to stop people from getting uncomfortable the lag needs to be reduced to almost zero. So you effectively need many depth planes you can project onto.
As for holographic displays, one of the problems with them, or any volumetric display, is that there is no occlusion in the scene. This really limits the quality and usefulness of this method.
Napsters new lawyer has argued in his opposition to the RIAA's motion for preliminary injunction that noncommercial digital copying of a copyrighted work by a consumer is legal.
This argument is based on The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 which amended the Copyright Act of 1976 and added, among other things:
"No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."
This seems like an answer to Sen. Hatch's questions about what is fair use. Just as long as it's noncommercial go ahead and copy to your hearts content.
Double jeopardy does not apply to civil trials. So the RIAA is free to sue napster again for copyright infringment even if the first suit is thrown out because of the misuse clause.