>I think this is cool tech, and valuable. I'm just not sure that it offers a communication benefit over well-lit, well-miced, wired, low latency, 8K videoconfer

>I think this is cool tech, and valuable. I'm just not sure that it offers a communication benefit over well-lit, well-miced, wired, low latency, 8K videoconferencing. >Maybe there's some 3D emotional perception face processing stuff that we have deep in our brains that can immensely benefit from this, but I'm skeptical. >I think simply doing 4k or 8k low latency high quality videoconferencing might be a 90 or 95% solution without needing special cameras/displays. From my experience, 4k or 8k doesn't matter. Sound quality actually matters most, really clear low latency audio alone will give you a surprisingly strong sense of presence. Video quality is important but 1080p is enough, beyond that the lighting and latency matter more. Equally important from my personal POV is video size - physical size. Take a cheap 65 inch TV, turn it vertically, and talk to someone on that. When your talking to someone that is actually life size the sense of presence is vastly improved, even at the exact same video quality. And TVs are so cheap this doesn't seem like much of a techical barrier. If you just screen share from your cell phone to your 65 inch TV and video chat -- holding everything else equal for audio and video quality -- it's SO MUCH BETTER.