Have my Rift for a couple of weeks, and besides Techdemos, I cannot use it longer than twenty minutes. If I cross that "certain" point, I feel awful for the rest of the day. Already caused me problems with customers as I was not able to work efficiently for the rest of the day. I cannot even describe the level of uneasiness that remains.
I am not sensitive to motion sickness. I can travel on ships even in harsher sea. As I kid, I used to have problems when reading inside a driving car, but a ginger gum did the trick.
Tried many tricks, and the only one which helps me to use it for maybe twenty or thirty minutes is to constantly tell myself that I am not moving. Sound strange, but I helps me. As soon as I drop out of this focus, the VR sickness kicks in real fast. In Half Life 2, the push of the troppers at the beginning is enough to make me feel sick immidiately, as it happens fast, your whole visual tells you that you are moving backwards rapidly, but your inner ear tells otherwise.
Many say that most of this should be adressed with lateral sensors, but I am not sure. In my case, it also is not a case of sensor lag, as they are spot on.
I loved the OR concept until I got one. Currently, I am split. It is one of the most impressive experiences I ever had in the digital world as long as I feel good. But as soon as my body gets cold, the sweating sets in I know that if I not stop within the next five minutes, I will feel sick for the rest of the day.
Couple of friends tried, nearly all of them had the same problem.
I agree to a degree (did I just type that?) that the comparison is not that good.
The problem is: we are not only comparing eleven years in astrophotography experience, post-processing experience, post-processing software evolution, but also two completely different optical drivetrains if I understand the article correctly.
Furthermore: different filters, different exposure times, different people doing them, different cameras and chips (or at least in different ages)....I could go on for a couple of hundred characters, everybody who does astrophotography knows what I mean.
It would have been far more interesting to have the data of one of the channels (maybe L would be suited if the narrowband filters of both exposures differ too much. Should be enough to get an impression of the size differences) stretched to have the same curves, then registered, then blinking them.
It also seems like both exposures used a different palette for the narrowbands. First looks kinda hubble-equse on some parts, while second looks very traditional (might even be L-RGB or - mind you - a modern OSC).
In this case, it indeed looks like a non-ideal comparison. Without any details about both images (filters, exposure times etc.) it is hard to compare them.
regards
tuo
Slashdot Mirror
This, exactly!
Have my Rift for a couple of weeks, and besides Techdemos, I cannot use it longer than twenty minutes. If I cross that "certain" point, I feel awful for the rest of the day. Already caused me problems with customers as I was not able to work efficiently for the rest of the day. I cannot even describe the level of uneasiness that remains.
I am not sensitive to motion sickness. I can travel on ships even in harsher sea. As I kid, I used to have problems when reading inside a driving car, but a ginger gum did the trick.
Tried many tricks, and the only one which helps me to use it for maybe twenty or thirty minutes is to constantly tell myself that I am not moving. Sound strange, but I helps me. As soon as I drop out of this focus, the VR sickness kicks in real fast. In Half Life 2, the push of the troppers at the beginning is enough to make me feel sick immidiately, as it happens fast, your whole visual tells you that you are moving backwards rapidly, but your inner ear tells otherwise.
Many say that most of this should be adressed with lateral sensors, but I am not sure. In my case, it also is not a case of sensor lag, as they are spot on.
I loved the OR concept until I got one. Currently, I am split. It is one of the most impressive experiences I ever had in the digital world as long as I feel good. But as soon as my body gets cold, the sweating sets in I know that if I not stop within the next five minutes, I will feel sick for the rest of the day.
Couple of friends tried, nearly all of them had the same problem.
I agree to a degree (did I just type that?) that the comparison is not that good. The problem is: we are not only comparing eleven years in astrophotography experience, post-processing experience, post-processing software evolution, but also two completely different optical drivetrains if I understand the article correctly. Furthermore: different filters, different exposure times, different people doing them, different cameras and chips (or at least in different ages)....I could go on for a couple of hundred characters, everybody who does astrophotography knows what I mean. It would have been far more interesting to have the data of one of the channels (maybe L would be suited if the narrowband filters of both exposures differ too much. Should be enough to get an impression of the size differences) stretched to have the same curves, then registered, then blinking them. It also seems like both exposures used a different palette for the narrowbands. First looks kinda hubble-equse on some parts, while second looks very traditional (might even be L-RGB or - mind you - a modern OSC). In this case, it indeed looks like a non-ideal comparison. Without any details about both images (filters, exposure times etc.) it is hard to compare them. regards tuo