5 ms·
No need to fake it... if you can get the retinal projection accurate enough, with fast enough eye tracking, the depth is as real as anything else you'll see in
by dedward 12y ago
No need to fake it... if you can get the retinal projection accurate enough, with fast enough eye tracking, the depth is as real as anything else you'll see in real life...the goal would be to have it feel completely natural.
- rbanffy 12y ago... and to do it, as well as motion tracking and environmental feature identification, in real-time with as little latency as possible, and do it on batteries. I keep feeling like watching the Longhorn demo at PDC 2003...
- RaleyField 12y agoThey added the third chip, besides CPU and GPU, they call it HPU (holographic processing unit), which could speed things considerably. If they hooked it directly to ccd then they could really grok terabytes of data on battery.
- rbanffy 12y agoMagic is not possible. Whatever the HPU does is still constrained by physics. They can't explain away the engineering problem with an invented new name for a device we know nothing about except that it defies the laws of physics WRT computation.
- benjaminl 12y agoWhat we do know is that fixed function ASICs can be can be 10s to 100s of times more power efficient than general purpose (Von Newman) computing. So noting they have described defies the laws of physics.
- tripzilch 12y agoSo, where would the terabytes per second come from? ... on a head-mounted device?
- walod 12y agoI really hope they get the accurate tracking and depth and getting objects to "stick" where they belong in 3d space correctly, without moving out of place or floating in a wrong way, with quick head movement. If they can do that, most of the battle is won and it will be amazing. Edit: although, of course they'll need some intelligence on the surroundings to identify surfaces and stuff. But imagine like re-decorating your work room, adding scifi textures or something, and maybe pipes or whatever ;p
- rasz_pl 12y agoThey didnt, otherwise they would show you eye view instead of third person impression of what its supposed to look like to the user. Most likely it suffers the same shaky snap laggy tracking like every other AR setup.
- UberMouse 12y agoBut they showed footage "through the eyes of the wearer" and they let press have a hands on demonstration, so it's not like they can really fake anything. I did see a tiny bit of judder in the footage that was supposed to be exactly what the person wearing the glasses would see, but it was hard to tell.
- mnem 12y agoIn the video I saw at the conference presentation, the "holograms" were always in front of the person's appendages, obscuring things: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6sL_5Wgvrg&spfreload=10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6sL_5Wgvrg&spfreload=10
- jongalloway2 12y agoPeter Bright said it didn't suffer from that - see the Minecraft section of his review: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/01/hands-on-with-hololens-making-the-virtual-real/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/01/hands-on-with-hololen...
- aragot 12y ago
- Retric 12y agoYou still need to blur objects that should not be in focus or you’re going to get mixed depth information. EX: http://www.photographyblogger.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Colored-Pencils15.jpg http://www.photographyblogger.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06... Now picture an infocus immage behind the blurry background pen's.