4 ms·

The interesting aspect here is the iPhone availability for Cardboard and the use of Youtube as the platform for 3D VR. Youtube already had stereoscopic support

The interesting aspect here is the iPhone availability for Cardboard and the use of Youtube as the platform for 3D VR. Youtube already had stereoscopic support, but there were not many clients available, content was limited and difficult to create with 3rd party solutions that all cost money. It never took off and couldn't ride the wave of the studio and CE company driven 3D momentum, which quieted down after a while anyway. This time Google ticks all the right boxes. Client devices on iOs and Android. The videoplayer everyone uses. A $5 cardboard enabler. A capture platform with GoPro and free assembly software.

pimlottc 11y ago
I'm looking forward to trying out Cardboard on iOS. Anyone have a recommendation for a good viewer manufacturer? (I'm a bit surprised at how much some of the kits are, given they're made of, er, cardboard).
- prbuckley 11y ago
  I am a bit partial as I am one of the founders of this company but here is a shameless plug for our vr viewers... http://www.dodocase.com/collections/virtual-reality http://www.dodocase.com/collections/virtual-reality
  - rgoodwintx 11y ago
    Thanks for the shameless plug :) I like that you called out the material quality/selection in your viewer. I'm actually kind of fascinated at the level of guidance Google gives to help partners make these. Anyway, pre-ordered and look forward to it! (iPhone 6)
jsprogrammer 11y ago
GoPro is a third party solution that costs money (a lot). What makes it different from before?
- julianpye 11y ago
  The playback devices were basically your PC with anaglyph glasses (terrible experience) or a PC with Nvidia 3D setup. This is the main difference. Editing software were expensive Sony setups ($5K), plugins for Adobe AE or very feature-poor setups such as from Magix (around $200). Editing was very tricky, since there were few standards here, just many custom ways to do it. This is a somewhat difference, since it can be assumed that the path from capture to quickly experienced content may be very short and allow for a camera to youtube experience. Creation devices were custom 3D rigs as expensive as the GoPro setup or consumer cameras like the Fuji W3 camera series. In this space, you are right, there is not so much difference there.

pimlottc 11y ago

I'm looking forward to trying out Cardboard on iOS. Anyone have a recommendation for a good viewer manufacturer? (I'm a bit surprised at how much some of the kits are, given they're made of, er, cardboard).

prbuckley 11y ago
I am a bit partial as I am one of the founders of this company but here is a shameless plug for our vr viewers... http://www.dodocase.com/collections/virtual-reality http://www.dodocase.com/collections/virtual-reality
- rgoodwintx 11y ago
  Thanks for the shameless plug :) I like that you called out the material quality/selection in your viewer. I'm actually kind of fascinated at the level of guidance Google gives to help partners make these. Anyway, pre-ordered and look forward to it! (iPhone 6)

jsprogrammer 11y ago

GoPro is a third party solution that costs money (a lot). What makes it different from before?

julianpye 11y ago
The playback devices were basically your PC with anaglyph glasses (terrible experience) or a PC with Nvidia 3D setup. This is the main difference. Editing software were expensive Sony setups ($5K), plugins for Adobe AE or very feature-poor setups such as from Magix (around $200). Editing was very tricky, since there were few standards here, just many custom ways to do it. This is a somewhat difference, since it can be assumed that the path from capture to quickly experienced content may be very short and allow for a camera to youtube experience. Creation devices were custom 3D rigs as expensive as the GoPro setup or consumer cameras like the Fuji W3 camera series. In this space, you are right, there is not so much difference there.