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

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#171

Post by collyw »

jl6 wrote: post #168
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.

I always find sports footage strange to watch on TV. I have a feeling its because of a higher frame rate, and less blurring of movement. Its kind of crisper but less absorbing.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#172

Post by Otik »

jl6 wrote: post #168
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.

People have been watching movies at 24fps for so long that they've been trained to put their brains into movie mode and suspend their disbelief when they see something at that rate.

There were similar outcries at the advents of colour movies and "talkies". Once people have watched a few HFR movies, I'm sure they'll get used to it and learn how to suspend their disbelief again.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#173

Post by yorak »

TheGRS wrote: post #48
tunesmith wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually loved 3D/48FPS - I felt like I was watching a play in a large diorama. I've regularly wondered if different theaters tuned it differently, or if people's brains just have differences, since so many other people reported 48FPS as looking fake.

If you already felt like it looked like a play, then that's why people didn't like it. Sets look like they would on a stage, not what the stage represents. If the story takes place in a castle in 18th century England, you want the viewer to be thinking "I'm in 18th century England right now" and not "I'm in a theater watching a film about 18th century England". Creating a film is a lot about suspension of disbelief,…

Or then it is like the case with youngsters and mp3s, where the studies have found that they actually prefer the "sound" of compressed music - with compression artifacts and all. If a hifi enthusiast (~tunesmith) would say that uncompressed music sounds better, you wouldn't shoot his argument down by saying that improved fidelity and dynamics just allow you to hear the music was recorded and postprocessed in a studio.

What I'm trying to say with this mp3 analogue is that it is very much a matter of habit and preference. Technically lower quality video does not lead to better immersion if it is not something you have learnt to expect.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#176

Post by Cthulhu_ »

Otik wrote: post #172
jl6 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People have been watching movies at 24fps for so long that they've been trained to put their brains into movie mode and suspend their disbelief when they see something at that rate. There were similar outcries at the advents of colour movies and "talkies". Once people have watched a few HFR movies, I'm sure they'll get used to it and learn how to suspend their disbelief again.

Maybe, maybe not - it may also depend on the movie being made. I thought the Hobbit was kinda tacky compared to LotR, it seemed to have a much smaller budget, especially in the CGI and extras/makeup department.

But, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for now - 3D was kinda crappy too at first, but some years later the movie makers have improved the technique to make it far less annoying. It's become more than just a gimmick now.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#177

Post by Cthulhu_ »

Otik wrote: post #172
jl6 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People have been watching movies at 24fps for so long that they've been trained to put their brains into movie mode and suspend their disbelief when they see something at that rate. There were similar outcries at the advents of colour movies and "talkies". Once people have watched a few HFR movies, I'm sure they'll get used to it and learn how to suspend their disbelief again.

Maybe, maybe not - it may also depend on the movie being made. I thought the Hobbit was kinda tacky compared to LotR, it seemed to have a much smaller budget, especially in the CGI and extras/makeup department.

But, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for now - 3D was kinda crappy too at first, but some years later the movie makers have improved the technique to make it far less annoying. It's become more than just a gimmick now.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#178

Post by Cthulhu_ »

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...

It's not about whether the brain can be tricked or jump scares will work, it's about whether you'll go "Oh wow" or "My head hurts this looks stupid"

Like an 8-bit guillotine vs this one.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#179

Post by jclarkcom »

schooldistrict wrote: post #15

so, based on the first image, I need to press 16 buttons to start capturing, and take 16 sd cards out before I can view them?

GoPro's can be controlled by a separate remote control (http://shop.gopro.com/accessories/smart-remote/ARMTE-002.htm...) which can signal up to 50 cameras at the same time. You can also access SD cards via USB without needing to remove them (as well as supply power). So google could do all this with no hardware mods to the cameras. From my test, GoPro's remote typically syncs cameras in under 5ms but sometimes it can be longer. Having a time offset between cameras can be dealt with in software in many cases.

Re: Jump – Experiences like you're actually there

#180

Post by Cthulhu_ »

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?

And why not? It's not about the hardware - it's about the videos they can create with a simple tool (and a few thousand to buy the cameras), which puts this technology within reach of the semi-professionals and higher-end hobbyists, instead of specialized equipment in Google Streetview cars. Like how Cardboard gives simple VR to anyone with a smartphone. It's not about whether it's a killer app, it's about planting the idea into people's minds - and eventually, about creating content. Because that's Google's trade - content. Cool 3D videos = more views than a regular gopro video = more advertising income.
Post reply on HN