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

Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 199 posts

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#161

Post by froo »

ipsin wrote: post #14

Looking at the picture immediately makes me think of it as an oversized crown or tiara you're supposed to wear on your head. Sort of a "Glass 3.0". The "Camera Crown" is an entirely impractical idea of course (that is, not the actual idea), but that does lead me to wonder how it's meant to be moved through spaces, if at all.

I expect these will be probably hard mounted to moving surfaces during sporting events.

The event that comes to mind is obviously motor racing, specifically Nascar. I think being able to experience crashes in 3D stereoscopic would be a big selling point for people.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#162

Post by greendestiny »

badsock wrote: post #146
greendestiny wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lightfields don't lose because of how they look, it's the lack of compression and difficulty in capturing them for real scenes that have held them back.

The apartment scene on the linked page was about 40MB compressed, IIRC. True that was a static scene, and admittedly once you start doing 30 FPS (perhaps no need for 90+ FPS that the HMD's require, because head movement can be rendered independantly of animation), you're up to 70GB/minute. Lots, for sure, but not out of the question.

It's not out of the question, but it's back to distribution by physical media and the only unequivocal technical advantage is in the rendering of reflections and refractions.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#163

Post by ddingus »

tw04 wrote: post #160

Looking at the top comments - I guess I'm completely crazy. I 100% thought this was a late April's fools. They legitimately think people are going to buy a 3D printed (~$12 hat), that holds about $5k worth of gopros? So... this is like another Nexus Q/really smart guy's horrible idea that's just going to disappear with no explanation?

Maybe they would given some basic incentive. Free internet, some discount, gift card?

I wouldn't underestimate what some people will do for a little spiff.

Maybe they won't do it again, but they might do it once, or on occasion. If one could manage churn reasonably? Who knows?

That said, not on your life. Not doing it.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#164

Post by diminish »

krick wrote: post #133
diminish wrote: post #3

Did anyone see this coming? Quite a successful secret by Google.

I don't understand why this comment is so heavily downvoted. I also was surprised how any information about google working on something like this has never appeared in my view.

This was the 2nd comment here at the beginning. Maybe there's tendency to downvote sibling comments? Also in the first version I had a grammar mistake. I wrote "Did anyone saw this coming?"

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#165

Post by [deleted] »

proee wrote: post #83

Has anyone see the opposite of this done - where you have a 360 degree array of cameras pointed at a target? This would allow the viewer to pan around the point of interest during an action sequence. I'd like to see an array of cameras using quadcopters flying around a target - say a whale jumping out of the water or a football player. This would allow the viewer to see all side of the action. Great for sports playba…

[deleted]

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#166

Post by fezz »

Nadya wrote: post #47
devindotcom wrote: post #22

I love all the experimentation in this area but I'm afraid systems like this are going to fall into a sort of uncanny valley of VR. Your brain is incredibly good at picking out the discrepancies between the real world and a high-resolution 120fps image with surround sound - just as it is incredibly good at recognizing objects and motions masquerading as human. It's like going from 2D/24FPS to 3D/48FPS. You'd think it…

Pay careful attention to her reaction: https://i.imgur.com/avVTybvh.jpg The brain is actually fairly easily tricked. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/05/2...

That's the stock, first time seeing VR reaction for alot of people.

What really matters though is persistence of engagement. Outside of those of us who've drank the koolaid or have a vested interest, how often the general public will come back to VR and how long they will stay inside it will be the critical factor for success.

That rate is still well below the threshold needed.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#167

Post by jannes »

fixermark wrote: post #59
peter303 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VR has been "around the corner" for 30 years. At some point Moore's law will give enough resolution and speed that images will seem real. I thought Oculus had reached that point, but I havent seen a demo yet. Wait a little longer and off the shelf solutions approach that point too.

The big risk to the 3D / VR market is generally the possibility that there is a percentage of the population that just isn't "wired" for it, i.e. they can't actually experience immersive 3D without physical revulsion from their sensory experiences not lining up. When you start designing a product for only N% of possible consumers, you're in trouble if N isn't large enough.

I get eyestrain/headache everytime I see a 3D movie in the cinema, and I believe that I'm not the only one experiencing this.

But this issue affecting N% of possible costumers certainly hasn't stopped 3D movies from succeeding at the box office. (I guess N would be similar for VR.)

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#168

Post by jl6 »

devindotcom wrote: post #22

I love all the experimentation in this area but I'm afraid systems like this are going to fall into a sort of uncanny valley of VR. Your brain is incredibly good at picking out the discrepancies between the real world and a high-resolution 120fps image with surround sound - just as it is incredibly good at recognizing objects and motions masquerading as human. It's like going from 2D/24FPS to 3D/48FPS. You'd think it…

My experience of The Hobbit was that the 24fps version felt like being in Middle Earth, and the 48fps felt like being on the film set - which strictly speaking was the more realistic experience, but far less satisfying.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#169

Post by fworm »

Myrannas wrote: post #84
iblaine wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>so clearly not reality, and anything that attempts to replicate reality too closely will be rejected You should see some Oculus demos in person before making claims that VR is easily rejected by your body. There are some roller coaster demos that can make you nauseous within a minute.

To be fair a reasonable amount of people find Oculus rift makes them nauseous in any application.

But 99% of times it's motion sickness. You only get it if the camera moves, which is not the case here.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#170

Post by tomjakubowski »

Nadya wrote: post #47
devindotcom wrote: post #22

I love all the experimentation in this area but I'm afraid systems like this are going to fall into a sort of uncanny valley of VR. Your brain is incredibly good at picking out the discrepancies between the real world and a high-resolution 120fps image with surround sound - just as it is incredibly good at recognizing objects and motions masquerading as human. It's like going from 2D/24FPS to 3D/48FPS. You'd think it…

Pay careful attention to her reaction: https://i.imgur.com/avVTybvh.jpg The brain is actually fairly easily tricked. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/05/2...

See also this guy's reaction (around 1:20):

https://youtu.be/Odax7F3tWhM?t=1m20s

Post reply on HN