Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jaked122]

I want my headset to be able to double as a heartrate monitor, eeg, and an cranial ultrasound. Since I won't get more than one of those... The cranial ultrasound sounds neat, but basically useless without too many damned sensors. Bone gets in the way... Maybe a head mounted CT scan would be easier.


Why do the monitors need to be of uniform display density? The human eye only has a few degrees of decent resolution, the rest is made up on the fly by the brain. We could save soo many pixels. Too bad a pixel costs far less than a cent.


Since I don't understand why people think these things are too expensive, I would like to remind you all that this is the first generation of the new wave of VR. Maybe I'm not right about that either, but I'm going to wait a while before I waste money on this.




Also I'm fairly sure that there are picocontrollers for less than 9 dollars, but then again, they don't have specs for a 2001 desktop. Sadly it's still below the price ratio that my shitty moore's law estimation should bring about. It should cost at most one thirty-two thousandth of a desktop back then.

[Putnam]

Why do the monitors need to be of uniform display density? The human eye only has a few degrees of decent resolution, the rest is made up on the fly by the brain. We could save soo many pixels. Too bad a pixel costs far less than a cent.

How good's eye tracking?

[mainiac]

Can they manufacture lcd devices with non uniform density?  Also, isn't the purpose of the lenses to create a higher resolution where your eye can see?

[jaked122]

How good's eye tracking?

Surprisingly bad given the amazing strides in computer vision we've seen recently. At least on conventional hardware, purpose built hardware suddenly looks like it might become cheap because of some british guy who built and wrote software for his own. I don't know who it was, but I know that I wasn't interested beyond assimilating that he was British and he developed eye tracking software.


 Luckily if it is situated solely on the eyes of the individual, it can read their ocular muscles to get a better idea of where they are looking, just swing around the screen so the center's there.


That sounds really dumb to me all the sudden, but also plausible to implement reasonably simply.

[Graknorke]

So I haven't seen this in this thread so far, but Facebook already killed the Rift, about half a year ago. No porn and probably limited violence. With those conditions why would anyone even care m8, let's be real.

[Reelya]

Why do the monitors need to be of uniform display density? The human eye only has a few degrees of decent resolution, the rest is made up on the fly by the brain. We could save soo many pixels. Too bad a pixel costs far less than a cent.

In theory you could use a lens to make pixels closer together directly in front of the eye, and therefore have bigger pixels in the peripheral vision. But that leads to a problem: people don't just look in one direction, they can move their eyes and heads independently, so it would lead to a situation where you can notice the variable pixel density by looking sideways.

You need more detail wherever the person is currently focusing, instead of at a specific location. In theory we could add eye tracking in there, and have a flexible lens that puts more pixels wherever your focus is, but that would have to be combined with new GPU coding to warp the display output in realtime to match your focal point. It would involve additional hardware and software systems specially built around providing that feature. Technologically, it might just be better to put a better screen in there.