4 ms·

A number of challenges exist for pass through AR. I’m short the camera system that you need does not exist. Cameras add latency. This causes nausea. Camera res

A number of challenges exist for pass through AR. I’m short the camera system that you need does not exist. Cameras add latency. This causes nausea. Camera resolution is low. When the screen is less than 10 cm from your eyes the grain is very noticeable. Cameras only have limited focal range. Camera dynamic range is low. I’m many settings it is hard to capture images that your eye could handle.

Robotbeat 7y ago
Thank you. That makes sense. I know some crazy high resolution lightfield cameras exist, but the hardware is so heavy there's no chance of getting it on your head. (In principle you could address this with a huge array of tiny cameras on a headset, I suppose? Like this: https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150421/technology-mobiles-and-tabs/article/52-megapixel-cameras-smartphones https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150421/technology-mobiles-an... or this: https://newsbeezer.com/austriaeng/lg-patent-shows-smartphone-with-16-cameras/ https://newsbeezer.com/austriaeng/lg-patent-shows-smartphone... ) Apparently display technology is also a limitation. Here's one attempt to pass-through AR (thank you for that vocabulary, BTW): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNbTCpURpQs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNbTCpURpQs Are you aware of any who do it better?
- mycall 7y ago
  Retinal projection work for display tech. https://www.bynorth.com/focals https://www.bynorth.com/focals
  - xpeon 7y ago
    Pretty cool, but could you project 3d object on these?
Dylan16807 7y ago
> the camera system that you need does not exist VR can work at 90Hz. If you spend money on a quality camera and a quality screen you can manage less end-to-end latency for AR. Focal range will be fine if you have a good sensor. Grain will be fine if you have a good screen. Compressing the dynamic range won't break anything. It doesn't have to work in every setting.

Robotbeat 7y ago

Thank you. That makes sense. I know some crazy high resolution lightfield cameras exist, but the hardware is so heavy there's no chance of getting it on your head. (In principle you could address this with a huge array of tiny cameras on a headset, I suppose? Like this: https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150421/technology-mobiles-and-tabs/article/52-megapixel-cameras-smartphones https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150421/technology-mobiles-an... or this: https://newsbeezer.com/austriaeng/lg-patent-shows-smartphone-with-16-cameras/ https://newsbeezer.com/austriaeng/lg-patent-shows-smartphone... ) Apparently display technology is also a limitation. Here's one attempt to pass-through AR (thank you for that vocabulary, BTW): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNbTCpURpQs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNbTCpURpQs Are you aware of any who do it better?

mycall 7y ago
Retinal projection work for display tech. https://www.bynorth.com/focals https://www.bynorth.com/focals
- xpeon 7y ago
  Pretty cool, but could you project 3d object on these?

Dylan16807 7y ago

> the camera system that you need does not exist VR can work at 90Hz. If you spend money on a quality camera and a quality screen you can manage less end-to-end latency for AR. Focal range will be fine if you have a good sensor. Grain will be fine if you have a good screen. Compressing the dynamic range won't break anything. It doesn't have to work in every setting.