5 ms·
> in VR it's rather....blurry I wonder where the issue lies; is 1080×1200 per eye just not high enough (considering the wide FOV)? Or is it the optics? I use
by danielbarla 9y ago
> in VR it's rather....blurry
I wonder where the issue lies; is 1080×1200 per eye just not high enough (considering the wide FOV)? Or is it the optics? I used to play E:D on somewhat of a potato machine, and it was pretty sharp on a standard monitor, with relatively low resolution.
- Taek 9y agoIt's a lot closer to your face. Your conical vision is seeing like an order of magnitude fewer pixels as when it's looking at the same resolution screen but 18" away.
- kijin 9y agoAlso, if you're a serious gamer, that screen 18" away is likely to have a lot more pixels than 1080x1200.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- PeterisP 9y agoYes, 1080x1200 per eye is nowhere close to high enough. I mean, sit back, look in the direction of your monitor, and estimate how large(small) part of your total view area is taken by it (for me it seems less than 1/9 for a quite large screen and 1/25 for a laptop). You'd need 1080x1200 for that central area alone.
- gaius 9y agois 1080×1200 per eye just not high enough (considering the wide FOV)? But that's more pixels than your retina has photoreceptors when you consider full colour (6M but it takes several of them working together to form a "pixel" equivalent)
- lokedhs 9y agoThe difference is that your eyes have much higher "resolution" in the centre of your view compared to the peripheral vision. But your eyes move all the time, so unless you can move the screen as fast as your eyes moves, a VR headset needs to have that highest resolution across your entire field of view.
- ajsalminen 9y agoAs one of the issues with VR has been (still is to an extent) the "screen door effect" which means being able to see the gaps between the individual pixels of the displays I think it's safe to say it's the low resolution.