5 ms·
I have envisioned a similar system for about a year now. Except it uses a semi-transparant display over one eye and a camera mounted to that. You wear a glove o
by ajkirwin 18y ago
I have envisioned a similar system for about a year now. Except it uses a semi-transparant display over one eye and a camera mounted to that. You wear a glove over one hand and you interact not with a projected display, which I find to be shockingly impersonal, but with a 'virtual' display that could handle depth as well.
A nicer way to interact with your environment, I'd think, especially as when processors get stronger you could handle an entire virtual 3D environment overlaid over one eye.
- Zev 18y agoWould it be possible to somehow have half of each eye covered instead of losing one eye completely? I know I lose a lot of information when I close one eye. Or would doing something like this be too distracting to be worth doing?
- Raphael 18y agoIt's transparent, so the UI will cover up as much or as little viewing area as needed.
- fsilva 18y agoI had similar ideas, but I think it is technically challenging to produce such transparent displays so close to the eye (i.e. integrated in eyeglasses, for example). The eye can't focus in objects that close. One solution could be doing some kind of retinal projection. You could adapt the optics in real time to compensate the eye's focus, and you would have a UI stamped into your normal vision at all times. The real problem is technology because, AFAIK, such systems are currently too big to be used in our day-to-day lives. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display )