3 ms·

This is very crass and I apologize in advance if you do not wish to answer. But have you experienced VR porn? I am not ashamed to say that I have, albeit throug

by legodt 10y ago

This is very crass and I apologize in advance if you do not wish to answer. But have you experienced VR porn? I am not ashamed to say that I have, albeit through non-dynamic fixed position video in a google cardboard video (think, split screen from two side-by-side cameras at a wide angle). The experience was rather unpleasant and disorienting, not much of a clear advantage over regular video porn beyond the fact that it takes up much more of your field of view. In response to more important parts of your comment, the most exciting applications of shared visions and unlimited screens I feel will come through mixed and augmented reality. The sharing experience is much greater when you can also see the person you are interacting with rather than just an avatar. The visual speed of communication will need real, emotional anchors unless you are willing to trade nuance and subtlety for the speed of digital visual communication, which could have disastrous implications for how we communicate with one another. Infinite screens, though, better hope that higher density VR displays will keep coming and processing power will expand with that. Text and traditional interfaces are very difficult in VR right now since everything is sharing what is really a small amount of pixels for how much of your FoV they inhabit.

ChuckMcM 10y ago
Not crass, its a reasonable question and the answer is "not really." The only VR app I've seen that was nominally 'porny' was a 3D app with rendered nude figures. If you ever saw the 'nude' hack to the nVidia "Dawn" demo that would be a good starting visualization. That said, it is a stereotype that pornographers are the first to exploit new technology commercially and that was what I was going for with that comment. What I actually expect the first "VR" porn to be basically actors filmed with one of the new 360 view cameras as the camera person walks around them. Basically replacing the "directors" idea of what would be useful to look at with your own choice. Given my understanding of how these sorts of things are shot, I expect this to be pretty challenging for the actors. The only "degree of freedom" is where you are looking. I'm a big fan of AR and I really love the CastAR stuff but recognize that what VR has is vomitness AR has in image registration and occlusion. In AR, the registration requirement is that you have to keep things in the environment pinned in the environment or your brain complains. There were some Google Tango demos that have that issue. When their position is "jittering" or worse moving around, your brain starts rebelling. The occlusion part is really hard for your eyeballs. Since the world is naturally pretty light anyway, in order to make a pixel appear before you that is "opaque" with respect to the background behind it, you need to either literally block out the pixel behind (using and LCD shutter or something), always insure the background is not "bright" (the CastAR solution with the retro-reflective cloth) or dump more light into your eye to overwhelm its notion of what color the pixel is (putatively the Magic leap solution). The "VR" solution is to put high definition cameras on the headset where your eyeballs would be with a similar field of view and sensitivity and then mix in the "outside" data with the generated data. And as you point out on the plus side if you can see someone in "real time" its a much better interactive experience.
wincy 10y ago
Google Cardboard video is going to be unpleasant and not representative of an actual VR video experience. The fidelity for Oculus Rift or Vive 180 degree videos are quite large, around 8GB or so for a half hour. They've been perfecting the technique as well, which normally involves very up close and personal scenes, POV stuff because the fidelity makes looking at objects far away look very aliased even at very high bitrates. That said, the experience is shocking in how compelling it can be. A lot of it is up to the skill of the people making the video right now. There's a lot of experimentation but I think VR porn will be a big deal as resolutions increase and bandwidth get cheaper.

by legodt 10y ago

ChuckMcM 10y ago

Not crass, its a reasonable question and the answer is "not really." The only VR app I've seen that was nominally 'porny' was a 3D app with rendered nude figures. If you ever saw the 'nude' hack to the nVidia "Dawn" demo that would be a good starting visualization. That said, it is a stereotype that pornographers are the first to exploit new technology commercially and that was what I was going for with that comment. What I actually expect the first "VR" porn to be basically actors filmed with one of the new 360 view cameras as the camera person walks around them. Basically replacing the "directors" idea of what would be useful to look at with your own choice. Given my understanding of how these sorts of things are shot, I expect this to be pretty challenging for the actors. The only "degree of freedom" is where you are looking. I'm a big fan of AR and I really love the CastAR stuff but recognize that what VR has is vomitness AR has in image registration and occlusion. In AR, the registration requirement is that you have to keep things in the environment pinned in the environment or your brain complains. There were some Google Tango demos that have that issue. When their position is "jittering" or worse moving around, your brain starts rebelling. The occlusion part is really hard for your eyeballs. Since the world is naturally pretty light anyway, in order to make a pixel appear before you that is "opaque" with respect to the background behind it, you need to either literally block out the pixel behind (using and LCD shutter or something), always insure the background is not "bright" (the CastAR solution with the retro-reflective cloth) or dump more light into your eye to overwhelm its notion of what color the pixel is (putatively the Magic leap solution). The "VR" solution is to put high definition cameras on the headset where your eyeballs would be with a similar field of view and sensitivity and then mix in the "outside" data with the generated data. And as you point out on the plus side if you can see someone in "real time" its a much better interactive experience.

wincy 10y ago

Google Cardboard video is going to be unpleasant and not representative of an actual VR video experience. The fidelity for Oculus Rift or Vive 180 degree videos are quite large, around 8GB or so for a half hour. They've been perfecting the technique as well, which normally involves very up close and personal scenes, POV stuff because the fidelity makes looking at objects far away look very aliased even at very high bitrates. That said, the experience is shocking in how compelling it can be. A lot of it is up to the skill of the people making the video right now. There's a lot of experimentation but I think VR porn will be a big deal as resolutions increase and bandwidth get cheaper.