3 ms·
When watching 3D movies with a VR headset you have to keep your head perfectly still or the lack of parallax destroys the 3D illusion. Compare to a 3D game wher
by evan_ 2y ago
When watching 3D movies with a VR headset you have to keep your head perfectly still or the lack of parallax destroys the 3D illusion. Compare to a 3D game where moving your head actually lets you move through space and actually look around objects.
Something like this applied to every frame of the movie would allow you to move around a little and preserve the perspective shifts. The limitation that you can only move about 4 feet in any direction would not matter for this use case.
Of course this comes at the expense of the director and cinematographer's intention, which is no small thing.
- dmarcos 2y agoDefinitely if there’s a future for 3D and immersive video it depends on adding more cues other than just stereo. Lack of parallax one of main reasons causing discomfort for many.
- ChicagoBoy11 2y agoHave you ever seen the Google Lightfields demo? They have a rig they concocted to essentially capture a "volume" of video to allow for the stereoscopic effect in VR AND which then cleverly presents a different combination of the footage it captured based on your precise head position, so it makes up for these distortions. I found it absolutely breathtaking... first time seeing VR for a space that actually made me feel like I was in it. This was A LONG time ago and I suspected I'd be seeing a lot more of that content, but I was... very wrong, it seems. Your point is completely correct. Even Apple's awesome new stereoscopic 3D short film for the AVP immediately loses what it could be its total awesomeness from this basic fact. The perspective being perfectly fixed will never quite be there to fool our brains so used to dealing with these micro-movements.
- dmarcos 2y agoYeah parallax, reflexions, shadows are as important as stereo. We’ve been always sold that stereo = 3D but it’s just one among many cues that the brain relies on.
- Stevvo 2y agoEach frame was between 200 and 300mb, at a much lower resolution than AVP. The storage and bandwidth required is a bit wild.
- km3r 2y agoHey finally a use case (for the masses) for gigabit at home at least.
- evan_ 2y agoI have seen that, and I came close to buying one of those Lytro light field cameras so many times (but thankfully restrained myself). Light field seemed like a huge obvious "way of the future" thing in the 2010s but with the benefit of hindsight it did not exactly seem to have changed the world.
- fsiefken 2y agoYes, it was awewome, to the Space Shuttle in a museum like that, a Lutheran church and a few other scenes. Six years ago. http://lightfield-forum.com/2018/11/google-showcases-light-field-virtual-reality-with-free-steam-vr-app-for-vive-rift-windows/ http://lightfield-forum.com/2018/11/google-showcases-light-f...
- Manuel_D 2y agoI suspect this would be feasible if filming was accompanied with a depth sensing camera like the Microsoft Kinect. In post production, you could tell roughly how far each pixel is from the camera which could aid in the reconstruction of a 3d scene. Maybe this could be done with just the aperture and focal distance, which most modern cinema cameras record as they film.