Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

kguttag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 216 posts

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#181

Post by wahnfrieden »

mellosouls wrote: post #128
wahnfrieden wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would you use it to let your employer monitor your attention, physical behavior and activity? beyond what an audio call provides them with

The one (using it to give another option for working) doesn't imply the other (consenting to increased monitoring).

already commonplace for employers to track mouse movement and the like for monitoring remote workers, sometimes to have video requirements as well (where video is not just another option to work with colleagues but a policy requirement so that managers/owners can surveil), because that's what they're able to track with the tech within a laptop. give them more sensors and they won't leave it to workers to decide (except to decide to leave those jobs in search of ones that surveil less). workers can organize against these conditions but it's not left to individual consent.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#182

Post by ghusbands »

geokon wrote: post #146
Zee2 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone close to this in the industry, I definitely agree. I also really don't know why he decided to deemphasize the perspective and depth correctness so much. He mentions it here: > In this case, they were willing to sacrifice image quality to try to make the position of things in the real world agree with where virtual objects appear. To some degree, they have accomplished this goal. But the image quality and l…

Just so I understand correctly - the fact that the cameras are places a couple of inches in front of where you're actual eyeballs are causes a lot of discomfort? And so you need to warp the camera feed to look like it should from your eyeball's perspective?

There's also the distance between the eyes not matching that of the cameras. And the fact that the 3d scene that isn't from the cameras does not have your eyes in the same position.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#183

Post by hardsnow »

As someone with first-hand experience in implementing pass-through AR, I found the review well-made (e.g., they measured photon-to-photon latency) and extremely interesting. Here's a few observations I made:

1. 30 Hz frame rate and 50ms photon-to-photon latency sound so bad that I'm surprised they launched this at all. I would be very interested in trying this out to see how (un)comfortable the experience is. What I would have expected is pass-through feed rate synchronized to display frame rate (i.e., 90 Hz) and photon-to-photon latency no more than perhaps 2 frames (22ms). At 90 Hz and 11ms you can actually play ping-pong while wearing a pass-through headset.

2. I can relate with the exposure, saturation, and noise issues. The existing well-tuned video ISP pipes aren't suitable for low latency, and building a new one that achieves low latency and gives a good picture in indoor lighting from an essentially smartphone sensor with exposure time 3. Above points to one possible explanation for the 30Hz capture; maybe they used a cheap sensor that can't produce usable picture in 4. I wonder if they do any warping to correct for the camera positions and how well that works. For AR-focused headset the ideal pass-through camera positions would approximate eye positions to minimize need for distortion. Even shifting capture positions a few centimeters forward from the eyes (which you'd need to do if you don't replace eyes with cameras or play tricks with optics) creates a subtle but noticeable effect unless corrected.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#184

Post by notjustanymike »

sergiotapia wrote: post #43
edgefield wrote: post #21

A new VR arcade opened up in my area and I visited with my son. They were using HTC Vive headsets, which retail for $1,000+. It’s the first time I really used VR, especially in a couch coop mode setup. The following struck me: (1) There is no killer, must have game for VR. Beat Saber seems to be the most popular and mainstream game but not nearly engaging enough to convince the mass market to buy one or more VR heads…

Half Life: Alyx is the killer VR app. It's so good that it ruined VR for me entirely. I can't play any other VR games, they all just feel like tech demos or shoddy old Unity asset flips. It's scary good and immersive. Try it, it will blow you away.

Try "Into the Radius", it's far lower budget but has that same immersive wow factor through smart art choices and clever interactions with physics objects.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#185

Post by monocularvision »

edgefield wrote: post #21

A new VR arcade opened up in my area and I visited with my son. They were using HTC Vive headsets, which retail for $1,000+. It’s the first time I really used VR, especially in a couch coop mode setup. The following struck me: (1) There is no killer, must have game for VR. Beat Saber seems to be the most popular and mainstream game but not nearly engaging enough to convince the mass market to buy one or more VR heads…

For me, the real “killer” VR experience is playing Walkabout Mini Golf with a friend remotely on Meta Quest 2’s. I have never felt like a remote person was right _there_ as I have when playing that game. And this is with silly, head-only avatars.

The combination of such realistic feeling gameplay and multiplayer is way more compelling than I thought it would be.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#186

Post by grumbel »

amelius wrote: post #26

How good is the resolution? Can you already use the device as a monitor-replacement? (I.e., coding behind a virtual monitor on an exotic location, while you're just at home behind the desk)

Resolution is roughly around 1800x1920 over 100° FOV. That means you get around 19 pixel-per-degree. Retina resolution is 60 pixel-per-degree. Acceptable text readability starts at around 30 pixel-per-degree.

So no, for most common uses this is nowhere near good enough. It's like having an old 720p LCD TV on your desk. It works for casual web browsing and movies, but far away from the image quality of a modern 4k monitor.

Nreal Air at around 49 pixel-per-degree is the closest thing to a monitor-replacement you can currently find, even has a plain HDMI input. Does however come with a lot of other short comings (no 6DOF tracking, monitor image not tracked, low FOV).

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#187

Post by grumbel »

vineyardmike wrote: post #136
jupp0r wrote: post #55

In spite of all the negativity, I'm super excited about the future of AR. - being able to see in extremely wide spectrum bands compared to human eyesight - being able to see in higher dynamic ranges than the human eye - being able to magnify little details and thus see with a higher spatial resolution than the human eye - all of this while enhancing your field of view with lots of other interesting information

None of these seem like things any company is actually working on…? Or at least no rumor has ever mentioned. (Yes thermal cameras exist, but not really as an AR overlay)

Steve Mann has build a HDR welding helmet[1] some years ago as a proof of concept. But I haven't seen any consumer products going in that direction yet. Closest I have seen is people strapping IR lights to their Quest2 to get night vision (works due to Quest2 cameras not having the typical IR filter) [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygcm0AQXX9k

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqR_1DyZejo

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#188

Post by rsynnott »

zmmmmm wrote: post #107
Baeocystin wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but view the (myriad) odd choices in the Quest Pro in the light of Carmack's resignation letter. It really does have the camel feeling of a horse designed by committee, instead of anything filled with 'give a damn'. I hope the folks there can figure out the operational difficulties, and find a way past whatever org chart drama is the source of the dysfunction. The Quest 2 has been a delight, but enough t…

It's definitely a compromise device. My gut feeling is various factors delayed its delivery and they ultimately were left with the choice of, deliver it now as it is or potentially lose the whole business market due to being overrun by Apple, HTC or others in that arena. Nearly all the interesting tech in the Quest Pro will be outdated within a year - it would be impossible for them to ship it if they waited even ano…

I mean, historically, "it isn't very good, but at least it exists" has _not_ been a particularly effective approach to consumer product launches, not if the competition is waiting a bit longer to bring out something good.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#189

Post by rsynnott »

vineyardmike wrote: post #7
RistrettoMike wrote: post #3

On mobile, so I can’t properly view/appreciate the detail-shots, but this is exactly the kind of post I’ve been waiting to see written covering the Quest Pro. I tried the Quest 2 last year mostly out of curiosity for the use cases that Meta themselves would go on to push as the primary focuses of the Quest Pro; VR productivity and virtual monitors. I was left drastically underwhelmed at the time with the resolution a…

If you’re interested in virtual monitors, and willing to be a bit ahem bleeding edge, try the NReal Air. They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME. They suffer the same issues as other VR solutions (focusing on fine text can be hard, it shakes on your head, etc). But unlike the Quest, you can set it to “Aircast” mode which basically replaces an V…

> They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME.

So, this is something I think I'm pretty much missing here. Acceptable 25" 1080p monitors are pretty cheap these days; why would a potential user not just get some of those?

VR might or might not be useful for some things (I'm pretty much unconvinced so far) but the "virtual monitor" use case is just baffling to me. Actual monitors exist.

Re: Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

#190

Post by mensetmanusman »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #180
mensetmanusman wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is already the case with laptops.

laptops don't track my physical behaviors besides mouse movement and keystrokes. they're far less aware of actual presence, attention or physical activity and are easily maskable

Work laptops do/can.
Post reply on HN