5 ms·

There is one thing that will make me buy VR, it's a full field of vision. They say virtual reality, but they sell virtual binoculars...

by d--b 6y ago

Raphmedia 6y ago
It's not that different than regular glasses. Anything that involves lens will require you to look at the middle and rotate your head.
- rhexs 6y ago
  My regular glasses don’t block out an additional 30% or more of my vision. I can see fine peripherally, it’s just a bit blurry.
  - joemi 6y ago
    I wonder if that might be a useful next step for FOV in VR... Some additional screen area in the peripheral that's lower res than the main screen area?
    - Raphmedia 6y ago
      People have been know to DIY leds around the lenses to help with that. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/how-side-mounted-leds-can-help-fix-vrs-tunnel-vision-and-nausea-problems/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/how-side-mounted-leds...
      - msikora 6y ago
        This seems like an obvious and fairly low cost solution (in terms of both money and CPU). I wonder why this wasn't integrated into commercial headsets yet?
    - nuclear_eclipse 6y ago
      You'll be interested to look up Foveated Rendering.
ccktlmazeltov 6y ago
have you tried it? I have a Quest and I don't really understand your complaint, as soon as you wear the headset you just forget about the real world.
- BillinghamJ 6y ago
  I have a Valve Index and love it. Yes it's immersive regardless, but VR still has such a long way to go on the quality front. FOV is fairly poor, pixel density is awful. I'm looking forward to an actual "retina display"-like option (60+ PPD) with higher FOV in another 5-10 years, but I'd assume that'll be 8K minimum per eye, maybe more like 10-12K.
  - shpx 6y ago
    If you have $6,000 then the Varjo VR-2 headset has a 60 PPD (pixels per degree) display embedded in the middle of a 15 PPD display. https://varjo.com/products/vr-2-pro/ https://varjo.com/products/vr-2-pro/
    - BillinghamJ 6y ago
      Very very low FOV though, even considering the 15 PPD portion
- joemi 6y ago
  I'm not the person you're asking but I've tried it and it goes both ways for me. Sometimes it's still very immersive, and other times the reduced FOV (compared to reality) does take away from the experience.
- pugworthy 6y ago
  Psychologically, yes one does forget about the real world. But in terms of actual FOV measurements the human eye is far better. However having that narrower FOV in VR is actually a good thing, as it makes for a smaller arc subtend for each pixel. If you were to give the wearer a 60 degree FOV in VR, they'd see very crisp and detailed things. But the more you stretch it out, the worse the effective visual quality becomes.
derefr 6y ago
I'm just waiting for tech that uses eye-tracking to put a tiny hi-DPI display that "moves around" so it stays right in line with your foveal vision, while having a static, head-wrapping low-DPI display behind it, to cover your peripheral vision. I can't imagine there's any tech that'd let an actual LCD move around at the speed your eyes do. But maybe the foveal display could be from ultra-low-power short-throw laser DLP, bounced right into your eyeballs? It could even use the glass surface of the peripheral LCD display as a DSLR-alike mirror, so that it can reach your pupil from a straight-on angle. What I'm describing does seem to exist (a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display) — but it doesn't seem that anybody has tried combining them with traditional LCD tech yet. I feel like such a hybrid device would have a number of obvious operational advantages, e.g. much lower bandwidth/render-power requirements (each frame, your GPU would only have to render a high-resolution image of a little square, along with a very low-res image of the rest of the scene.)
- shock-value 6y ago
  > I feel like such a hybrid device would have a number of obvious operational advantages, e.g. much lower bandwidth/render-power requirements (each frame, your GPU would only have to render a high-resolution image of a little square, along with a very low-res image of the rest of the scene.) Foveated rendering provides these benefits without needing a mechanical mechanism. (Though it does still require full-field high resolution displays and apparently the eye-tracking requirements haven't been fully solved yet -- which would also preclude your suggestion of a hybrid device.)
- buzer 6y ago
  > I'm just waiting for tech that uses eye-tracking to put a tiny hi-DPI display that "moves around" so it stays right in line with your foveal vision, while having a static, head-wrapping low-DPI display behind it, to cover your peripheral vision. Isn't that what Varjo is doing? They do have headsets out, but they are strictly targeting enterprises at this point (cheapest headsets start at 5k + mandatory support for 800). [edit] actually no, I remember them discussing that approach, but apparently they went with some kind of semi-transparent mirror to combine the images. https://varjo.com/blog/introducing-bionic-display-how-varjo-delivers-human-eye-resolution/ https://varjo.com/blog/introducing-bionic-display-how-varjo-... & https://gfycat.com/perkywastefulhorsechestnutleafminer https://gfycat.com/perkywastefulhorsechestnutleafminer
Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
You want the Pimax 5K then. It claims a 200 degree FOV.
- moron4hire 6y ago
  As someone who owns a Pimax 5k, you do not want a Pimax 5k.
  - Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
    Oh. What's wrong with it?
    - moron4hire 6y ago
      All the extra angles of FOV are very distorted, and there is a red static constantly fuzzing away in the display. Plus, you have to deal with the Pimax company, which has to be one of the most incompetent companies I've ever met when it comes to taking money and delivering product without stepping into the realm of actual fraud. When I bought mine, it was 3 false "it's shipped" announcements, 2 months, and a threat to reverse my credit card charge before I finally received it.
Kiro 6y ago
The FoV is anything but binoculars on modern headsets. It's as close to full FoV that you're never bothered by it or even think about it.

There is one thing that will make me buy VR, it's a full field of vision. They say virtual reality, but they sell virtual binoculars...

by d--b 6y ago

There is one thing that will make me buy VR, it's a full field of vision. They say virtual reality, but they sell virtual binoculars...

Raphmedia 6y ago

It's not that different than regular glasses. Anything that involves lens will require you to look at the middle and rotate your head.

rhexs 6y ago
My regular glasses don’t block out an additional 30% or more of my vision. I can see fine peripherally, it’s just a bit blurry.
- joemi 6y ago
  I wonder if that might be a useful next step for FOV in VR... Some additional screen area in the peripheral that's lower res than the main screen area?
  - Raphmedia 6y ago
    People have been know to DIY leds around the lenses to help with that. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/how-side-mounted-leds-can-help-fix-vrs-tunnel-vision-and-nausea-problems/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/how-side-mounted-leds...
    - msikora 6y ago
      This seems like an obvious and fairly low cost solution (in terms of both money and CPU). I wonder why this wasn't integrated into commercial headsets yet?
  - nuclear_eclipse 6y ago
    You'll be interested to look up Foveated Rendering.

ccktlmazeltov 6y ago

have you tried it? I have a Quest and I don't really understand your complaint, as soon as you wear the headset you just forget about the real world.

BillinghamJ 6y ago
I have a Valve Index and love it. Yes it's immersive regardless, but VR still has such a long way to go on the quality front. FOV is fairly poor, pixel density is awful. I'm looking forward to an actual "retina display"-like option (60+ PPD) with higher FOV in another 5-10 years, but I'd assume that'll be 8K minimum per eye, maybe more like 10-12K.
- shpx 6y ago
  If you have $6,000 then the Varjo VR-2 headset has a 60 PPD (pixels per degree) display embedded in the middle of a 15 PPD display. https://varjo.com/products/vr-2-pro/ https://varjo.com/products/vr-2-pro/
  - BillinghamJ 6y ago
    Very very low FOV though, even considering the 15 PPD portion
joemi 6y ago
I'm not the person you're asking but I've tried it and it goes both ways for me. Sometimes it's still very immersive, and other times the reduced FOV (compared to reality) does take away from the experience.
pugworthy 6y ago
Psychologically, yes one does forget about the real world. But in terms of actual FOV measurements the human eye is far better. However having that narrower FOV in VR is actually a good thing, as it makes for a smaller arc subtend for each pixel. If you were to give the wearer a 60 degree FOV in VR, they'd see very crisp and detailed things. But the more you stretch it out, the worse the effective visual quality becomes.

derefr 6y ago

I'm just waiting for tech that uses eye-tracking to put a tiny hi-DPI display that "moves around" so it stays right in line with your foveal vision, while having a static, head-wrapping low-DPI display behind it, to cover your peripheral vision. I can't imagine there's any tech that'd let an actual LCD move around at the speed your eyes do. But maybe the foveal display could be from ultra-low-power short-throw laser DLP, bounced right into your eyeballs? It could even use the glass surface of the peripheral LCD display as a DSLR-alike mirror, so that it can reach your pupil from a straight-on angle. What I'm describing does seem to exist (a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display) — but it doesn't seem that anybody has tried combining them with traditional LCD tech yet. I feel like such a hybrid device would have a number of obvious operational advantages, e.g. much lower bandwidth/render-power requirements (each frame, your GPU would only have to render a high-resolution image of a little square, along with a very low-res image of the rest of the scene.)

shock-value 6y ago
> I feel like such a hybrid device would have a number of obvious operational advantages, e.g. much lower bandwidth/render-power requirements (each frame, your GPU would only have to render a high-resolution image of a little square, along with a very low-res image of the rest of the scene.) Foveated rendering provides these benefits without needing a mechanical mechanism. (Though it does still require full-field high resolution displays and apparently the eye-tracking requirements haven't been fully solved yet -- which would also preclude your suggestion of a hybrid device.)
buzer 6y ago
> I'm just waiting for tech that uses eye-tracking to put a tiny hi-DPI display that "moves around" so it stays right in line with your foveal vision, while having a static, head-wrapping low-DPI display behind it, to cover your peripheral vision. Isn't that what Varjo is doing? They do have headsets out, but they are strictly targeting enterprises at this point (cheapest headsets start at 5k + mandatory support for 800). [edit] actually no, I remember them discussing that approach, but apparently they went with some kind of semi-transparent mirror to combine the images. https://varjo.com/blog/introducing-bionic-display-how-varjo-delivers-human-eye-resolution/ https://varjo.com/blog/introducing-bionic-display-how-varjo-... & https://gfycat.com/perkywastefulhorsechestnutleafminer https://gfycat.com/perkywastefulhorsechestnutleafminer

Sohcahtoa82 6y ago

You want the Pimax 5K then. It claims a 200 degree FOV.

moron4hire 6y ago
As someone who owns a Pimax 5k, you do not want a Pimax 5k.
- Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
  Oh. What's wrong with it?
  - moron4hire 6y ago
    All the extra angles of FOV are very distorted, and there is a red static constantly fuzzing away in the display. Plus, you have to deal with the Pimax company, which has to be one of the most incompetent companies I've ever met when it comes to taking money and delivering product without stepping into the realm of actual fraud. When I bought mine, it was 3 false "it's shipped" announcements, 2 months, and a threat to reverse my credit card charge before I finally received it.

Kiro 6y ago

The FoV is anything but binoculars on modern headsets. It's as close to full FoV that you're never bothered by it or even think about it.