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

Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

shopify.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 277 posts

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#41

Post by IIAOPSW »

ilkke wrote: post #26
bm3719 wrote: post #5

Can't help but notice that we keep wanting to make content that should be flat more 3D (e.g., animated 3D backgrounds, scroll filler on corporate pages, the entire metaverse), and content that could benefit from being 3D more flat (like UI buttons losing their pseudo-3D bevels and not looking like interactive widgets at all).

Re UI, my theory is that this is partly because minimalism doesn't become dated as fast. Related, I remember that what blew me away upon seeing the 3DS for the first time was not the 3d playfield (which looked exactly as I expected), but the UI in 3D. It really felt like a glimpse into an exciting future.

Here's why minimalism has such staying power. Fundamentally, pleasing design is about repetition and consistency. Brian loves patterns, that's all there is to it. Good graphic appeal isn't a seasoning like salt which you can just sprinkle on by paying for a few better "designed" assets. Its possible to make really pleasing design out of parts that are individually seen as cheap and low quality. Its also possible to make tacky tripe out of great quality parts. The important thing is consistency and arrangement. A pleasing design is one that lends itself to file compression.

Minimalism is a very easy style to pull off because the fewer elements there are the easier it is to make them all consistent, uniform, simple. It takes the least time to get it right. It can be handed off to someone else without explaining any "vision" or guidelines.

None of this is to say it is bad. Minimalism is good actually. Just that minimalism isn't uniquely good. Other designs can be timeless, they just rarely are.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#42

Post by ly3xqhl8g9 »

jemmyw wrote: post #13

It doesn't work if 2 people are looking at the screen?

Perhaps the pixels could be directional [1] [2]. Not sure if vaporware or an actual product, can't find more details since the Delta airport video.

[1] https://www.misappliedsciences.com/home/technology.html

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82eAnMpeNZ4

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#43

Post by jchw »

bigmattystyles wrote: post #32
Waterluvian wrote: post #11

I don’t know any of the science behind it, but my experience with these kinds of ideas (including the 2007 wiimote target demo which I replicated and showed to family), is that they feel exhausting to use beyond a 15 min novelty. My guess is that the brain detects that the motions and such are not quite right, and like a wrong eyeglass prescription, your brain and eyes work overtime trying to figure out compensation.

I had the same thing with compiz when it first came out. I loved it in all the videos; and the first day, but I quickly switched back to plain old desktops.

I actually did use Compiz+Beryll for a fairly long while. Admittedly, the bugs were annoying, but after switching off the most gimmicky bits or at least making them less pronounced (like Wobbly Windows, lol) I found it to be quite nice to use. It felt a bit like if you were using WindowBlinds but supercharged.

I later switched to i3wm and threw away desktop effects though. I wouldn't mind them, but I don't miss them either.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#44

Post by astrange »

ilkke wrote: post #26
bm3719 wrote: post #5

Can't help but notice that we keep wanting to make content that should be flat more 3D (e.g., animated 3D backgrounds, scroll filler on corporate pages, the entire metaverse), and content that could benefit from being 3D more flat (like UI buttons losing their pseudo-3D bevels and not looking like interactive widgets at all).

Re UI, my theory is that this is partly because minimalism doesn't become dated as fast. Related, I remember that what blew me away upon seeing the 3DS for the first time was not the 3d playfield (which looked exactly as I expected), but the UI in 3D. It really felt like a glimpse into an exciting future.

Minimal "flat" UIs are possible for normal people to implement. In the 2000s I had no idea how I was supposed to make a button that looks like it's made of drop shadows and fine Corinthian leather for a project in my free time.

(For that matter I don't know how I'd get it done for a professional project either.)

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#45

Post by astrange »

wodenokoto wrote: post #12

The fire phone did this 7 years later with 4 front facing tracking cameras and nobody cared

The New Nintendo 3DS was based around this, and although they abandoned it I think there's still a lot of room for something like it. It's more AR than AR is.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#46

Post by 6177c40f »

bobnamob wrote: post #37

Cynical take: Seems like an excuse for Shopify to add eye tracking to product pages for ad analytics

Unfortunately it's stuff like this that's poisoned otherwise cool new tech for me. I can't help but wonder "how will this be used to advertise to me?"

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#47

Post by galaxyLogic »

Less is more. We don't need 3D except in a few cases. Computer output is about information, not trying to make things look like in real life 3D. When we read a book we just need some black-and-white text.

There are great applications for virtual reality for instance in medicine. But in general 3D is only needed when it is needed. If it is not needed then pushing it onto users becomes a distraction.

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#48

Post by IshKebab »

I actually implemented this at the time because it looked so cool. Unfortunately it doesn't work nearly so well in real life as it does on a video.

I don't exactly recall why but I think it's just that there are so many cues that you're looking at a screen that your brain won't accept that it's really a 3D scene.

It's a bit like those painted or chalked perspective illusions. They look great in a photo or video. Not so much in real life.

(I don't think it's because of stereoscopy because I am stereoblind.)

Re: Could we make the web more immersive using a simple optical illusion?

#49

Post by dr_dshiv »

Waterluvian wrote: post #11

I don’t know any of the science behind it, but my experience with these kinds of ideas (including the 2007 wiimote target demo which I replicated and showed to family), is that they feel exhausting to use beyond a 15 min novelty. My guess is that the brain detects that the motions and such are not quite right, and like a wrong eyeglass prescription, your brain and eyes work overtime trying to figure out compensation.

This is starting to happen to me with bad AI art. Subtle things that I didn’t notice for month now look glaringly out of place.
Post reply on HN