27 ms·
Potential legal minefield, too. Take drone flying, for example. It requires that you maintain visual line of sight (most of the time, without special exceptions
by abakker 7y ago
Potential legal minefield, too. Take drone flying, for example. It requires that you maintain visual line of sight (most of the time, without special exceptions). But, as a drone flyer in a commercial setting, you frequently want to see through the camera also. Given that, AR suits nicely, since you can overall both. VR doesn't because it is blocking your true visual line of sight.
In a perfect world, I agree with you. VR would be nicer, especially once the Cameras include thermal/night vision/other.
- Robotbeat 7y agoGood point about the thermal/night vision thing. We effectively do this already with nightvision goggles. It'd be super amazing to use pass-through stereographic ultrasound images for diving in murky waters (or smoke?). A potential game changer in some instances. Imagine directly overlaying a "4D" ultrasound in realtime with careful sensor position registration... it'd make all manner of medical procedures a lot clearer. You could immediately see what way a baby was turned (without training, even), for instance. I guess in those cases, you wouldn't even need conceptually seemless immersion, just precise enough for eye-hand coordination.
- ferongr 7y ago>But, as a drone flyer in a commercial setting, you frequently want to see through the camera also Commercial drone photo/videographers should be using a pilot to control the drone, while they themselves control the camera.
- Robotbeat 7y agoI think the idea is that even the pilot may want to see through the camera, i.e. first person flying.