3 ms·

Hi. I'm the author of this blog. I'll try and keep on top of any comments or questions posted here. Sorry it's a bit long, but hopefully I'm not the only perso

by tb100 11y ago

Hi. I'm the author of this blog. I'll try and keep on top of any comments or questions posted here. Sorry it's a bit long, but hopefully I'm not the only person who finds this stuff interesting :)

achr2 11y ago
One thing to note is that light perception in human vision is not purely additive - especially when focal planes are taken into consideration. With proper light-field technology (i.e. actual projections within a focal plane) the effect of non-opacity could be greatly reduced. In any case, your example images showing additive light do not mimic reality very well. For example, in the far right images, the view of mars that would be perceived by a human eye would look nearly perfectly opaque (except where the 'dark bands' are less bright than the background). You certainly would not perceive the black screen bezel at all.
- tb100 11y ago
  Thanks for the note, I'll add some more caveats to that section; I don't really know anything about the human vision system. Do you know of any better mathematical models of human perception that I could use to produce more accurate mock-ups? I've tried on some of the glasses from Meta and Epson that consist of more traditional micro-displays and optics to set a fixed virtual focus plane a couple of metres away. It's definitely possible to shift attention between the real and the virtual, and not feel too distracted even with relatively busy background scenes (using some of the "shades" definitely helps to boost contrast of the virtual content though). When real and virtual are at different focal planes it seemed to make maintaining attention on the virtual content easier, and stereo also seems to help with that. However the true promise of "Mixed Reality" experiences are when you don't have to choose to attend to real or virtual, but simply look at a part of the combined scene. When virtual and real are so closely connection it seems likely to me that the depth of the virtual content would need to be matched with to the depth of the real world, so the virtual and real focal planes would be the same and the user would lose the ability to use depth cues to direct attention. If real and virtual are at the same depth, how would you imagine the scene would look? Is the additive mock-up still unrealistic?

by tb100 11y ago

Hi. I'm the author of this blog. I'll try and keep on top of any comments or questions posted here. Sorry it's a bit long, but hopefully I'm not the only person who finds this stuff interesting :)

achr2 11y ago

One thing to note is that light perception in human vision is not purely additive - especially when focal planes are taken into consideration. With proper light-field technology (i.e. actual projections within a focal plane) the effect of non-opacity could be greatly reduced. In any case, your example images showing additive light do not mimic reality very well. For example, in the far right images, the view of mars that would be perceived by a human eye would look nearly perfectly opaque (except where the 'dark bands' are less bright than the background). You certainly would not perceive the black screen bezel at all.

tb100 11y ago
Thanks for the note, I'll add some more caveats to that section; I don't really know anything about the human vision system. Do you know of any better mathematical models of human perception that I could use to produce more accurate mock-ups? I've tried on some of the glasses from Meta and Epson that consist of more traditional micro-displays and optics to set a fixed virtual focus plane a couple of metres away. It's definitely possible to shift attention between the real and the virtual, and not feel too distracted even with relatively busy background scenes (using some of the "shades" definitely helps to boost contrast of the virtual content though). When real and virtual are at different focal planes it seemed to make maintaining attention on the virtual content easier, and stereo also seems to help with that. However the true promise of "Mixed Reality" experiences are when you don't have to choose to attend to real or virtual, but simply look at a part of the combined scene. When virtual and real are so closely connection it seems likely to me that the depth of the virtual content would need to be matched with to the depth of the real world, so the virtual and real focal planes would be the same and the user would lose the ability to use depth cues to direct attention. If real and virtual are at the same depth, how would you imagine the scene would look? Is the additive mock-up still unrealistic?