Corsair QL120 and QL140 RGB fan review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
Corsair Void RGB Elite Wireless Headset review
Team Group PD400 Portable SSD review
AMD Athlon 3000G review
Team Group T-Force Delta Max 1 TB SSD review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - November 2019
ASUS ROG Rampage VI Extreme Encore review
Toshiba RC500 500GB NVMe M.2 SSD review
Promo: URcdkey Black Friday Windows 10 Pro for $12
Nvidia demos prototype lightfield VR glasses
At the Virtual Reality exhibit in LA Nvidia is showing a prototype of their vr-glasses in development based on lightfield technology. The company is working together with Stanford university on this project. The glasses make it possible to focus based on any angle in the displayed field.
Not a lot of information is available on the glasses other then a few photos have surfaced. The collaboration with Stanford university is pretty unique though and the project seems to be called 'Light Field Stereoscope' at the university .
The VR glasses should enable users to focus in a scene in a natural manner, so if you look close-by the imagery gets sharp, but if you look into the distance, that'll focus as well. The glasses make use of two layers of LCDs to create depth combined with a stereoscopic technology to project imagery to each individual eye. The result would be that the images are not flat, deducting the load on your eyes, but likely also reduces motion sickness.
The depth effect is achieved by displaying 25 images to each eye, which kinda makes it holographic now that I think of it. The VR glasses in display are protoypes from Nvidia and I would assume Stanford - they might become available to the market somewhere in the 2018 time-frame.
Nvidia drops Samsung and uses TSMC for Pascal - 09/17/2015 07:53 AM
So we already mentioned would very likely be made on TSMC 16nm FiNFET. The target release date for this GPU is 2016. The product would be released as GP100 and will be the succesor to the GM200 series...
Nvidia Disables Overclocking for Series 900 Mobile GPUs - 02/12/2015 05:53 PM
Nvidia once again managed to irritate a lot of people, this time the latest driver update disables overclocking for the mobile Series 900. Until recently these parts could be overclocked....
NVIDIA DRIVE Automotive Computers - 01/05/2015 09:49 AM
Transporting the world closer to a future of auto-piloted cars that see and detect the world around them, NVIDIA today introduced NVIDIA DRIVE automotive computers -- equipped with powerful capabiliti...
NVIDIA does $5 million deal with Ubisoft - 10/02/2013 11:39 AM
It looks like NVIDIA spend $5 million to optimize Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed 5 and Watch Dogs. In fact AMD also is rumored to have invested a similar sum in Battlefield 4, exact details about these...
NVIDIA delays Tegra 4 in favor of Tegra 4i - 05/17/2013 07:30 AM
NVIDIA decided to delay the introduction of its Tegra 4 SoC to speed up the arrival of Tegra 4i. The latter part features an integrated LTE baseband modem, a feature the firm desperately lacks in its ...
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1688
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1688
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5222924 Posted on: 01/25/2016 01:44 PM
The image will always be flat on the retina. No amount of LCDs will change that. Still, it's too bad they need to use the dusty old LCD technology in these goggles. I imagine that creates other drawbacks as well in addition to the lousier colours. Must have been a difficult choice when others use OLED, but since it's Nvidia, I guess they judged the more novel, proposed, benefits of the design worth trying.
The image will always be flat on the retina. No amount of LCDs will change that. Still, it's too bad they need to use the dusty old LCD technology in these goggles. I imagine that creates other drawbacks as well in addition to the lousier colours. Must have been a difficult choice when others use OLED, but since it's Nvidia, I guess they judged the more novel, proposed, benefits of the design worth trying.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5222954 Posted on: 01/25/2016 03:15 PM
Finally - something that isn't just yet another stereoscopic headset.
@Kaarme
The image will be flat, but something like this should give realistic depth perception, though, I think it should've used 3 LCDs instead of 2. For example, imagine you're playing a racing game (with the camera in the driver's seat): The dashboard and steering wheel would be on the front LCD, objects immediately in front of you would be in the middle LCD, and any object you can't touch would be on the back LCD. This would be an incredibly powerful visual effect.
As for using LCDs, they don't really have another option. LCD is the only display technology that's actually see-through.
Finally - something that isn't just yet another stereoscopic headset.
@Kaarme
The image will be flat, but something like this should give realistic depth perception, though, I think it should've used 3 LCDs instead of 2. For example, imagine you're playing a racing game (with the camera in the driver's seat): The dashboard and steering wheel would be on the front LCD, objects immediately in front of you would be in the middle LCD, and any object you can't touch would be on the back LCD. This would be an incredibly powerful visual effect.
As for using LCDs, they don't really have another option. LCD is the only display technology that's actually see-through.
Gen Techa
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: 2015-01-14
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: 2015-01-14
#5222975 Posted on: 01/25/2016 04:09 PM
Vr
I have been waiting for home VR since I was a kid. I wonder which one will be better. Steam, Oculus, or Nvidia?
Vr
I have been waiting for home VR since I was a kid. I wonder which one will be better. Steam, Oculus, or Nvidia?
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5222979 Posted on: 01/25/2016 04:16 PM
There are a lot more options than that. I currently own an OSVR. But as of right now, Oculus is probably the best choice due to being the most widely adopted.
I have been waiting for home VR since I was a kid. I wonder which one will be better. Steam, Oculus, or Nvidia?
There are a lot more options than that. I currently own an OSVR. But as of right now, Oculus is probably the best choice due to being the most widely adopted.
TimmyP
Senior Member
Posts: 564
Joined: 2003-07-02
Senior Member
Posts: 564
Joined: 2003-07-02
#5222990 Posted on: 01/25/2016 04:47 PM
God damn this typical negativity of this site. Shut up.
Ban me.
The image will always be flat on the retina. No amount of LCDs will change that. Still, it's too bad they need to use the dusty old LCD technology in these goggles. I imagine that creates other drawbacks as well in addition to the lousier colours. Must have been a difficult choice when others use OLED, but since it's Nvidia, I guess they judged the more novel, proposed, benefits of the design worth trying.
God damn this typical negativity of this site. Shut up.
Ban me.
jura11
Senior Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: 2015-03-20
Senior Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: 2015-03-20
#5223006 Posted on: 01/25/2016 05:25 PM
+1
Agree with this,I've only on few days borrowed Oculus Rift DK2 for testing in few SW and as above is widely supported right now,what will be in next 12 months,hard to say,VIVE or PS4 Morpheus or MS Hololens plus NVIDIA and few others starting to surface and end of the year,we will see which one is worth to get
Thanks,Jura
There are a lot more options than that. I currently own an OSVR. But as of right now, Oculus is probably the best choice due to being the most widely adopted.
+1
Agree with this,I've only on few days borrowed Oculus Rift DK2 for testing in few SW and as above is widely supported right now,what will be in next 12 months,hard to say,VIVE or PS4 Morpheus or MS Hololens plus NVIDIA and few others starting to surface and end of the year,we will see which one is worth to get
Thanks,Jura
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5223058 Posted on: 01/25/2016 09:03 PM
I suspect it should be somewhat easy to narrow down the results. Console accessories (particularly ones that were released mid-cycle) don't tend to get much attention, so Morpheus won't get far. Nvidia's VR seems very difficult to develop for. Google Cardboard is more of a proof-of-concept than an actual product, and shouldn't be taken too seriously. Hololens is reality augmentation, not VR, which limits the amount of uses for it (doesn't mean it isn't cool though). The way I see it, Oculus, Vive, and OSVR will be the main contenders, since they're the right balance between manufacturing costs, ease of development, and software availability.
Agree with this,I've only on few days borrowed Oculus Rift DK2 for testing in few SW and as above is widely supported right now,what will be in next 12 months,hard to say,VIVE or PS4 Morpheus or MS Hololens plus NVIDIA and few others starting to surface and end of the year,we will see which one is worth to get
I suspect it should be somewhat easy to narrow down the results. Console accessories (particularly ones that were released mid-cycle) don't tend to get much attention, so Morpheus won't get far. Nvidia's VR seems very difficult to develop for. Google Cardboard is more of a proof-of-concept than an actual product, and shouldn't be taken too seriously. Hololens is reality augmentation, not VR, which limits the amount of uses for it (doesn't mean it isn't cool though). The way I see it, Oculus, Vive, and OSVR will be the main contenders, since they're the right balance between manufacturing costs, ease of development, and software availability.
jura11
Senior Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: 2015-03-20
Senior Member
Posts: 2058
Joined: 2015-03-20
#5223066 Posted on: 01/25/2016 09:50 PM
Agree,but still if Oculus will cost $600 which is way too much and plus PC which will run this at reasonable details this can be maybe hard pill for many people..
VIVE not sure what price point will be,but still we don't know who will be developing the games for them and if two or three studios and rest will be developing for Oculus and at the end you will end up with 3 VR headsets
Nvidia,I remember still bloody 3D Stereoscopic/Vision and where is this now,due this go with their VR I would be very cautious for now,but they I'm sure develop or they're developed their GameWorksVR
Regarding the Morpheus,this can be dark horse as PS4 install base is good to start and if price will be good enough,many people will adopt that sooner than above technologies,but as I said,we will see when all those VR starting to rolling out and mainly if games will be out which will use that in full potential
Thanks,Jura
I suspect it should be somewhat easy to narrow down the results. Console accessories (particularly ones that were released mid-cycle) don't tend to get much attention, so Morpheus won't get far. Nvidia's VR seems very difficult to develop for. Google Cardboard is more of a proof-of-concept than an actual product, and shouldn't be taken too seriously. Hololens is reality augmentation, not VR, which limits the amount of uses for it (doesn't mean it isn't cool though). The way I see it, Oculus, Vive, and OSVR will be the main contenders, since they're the right balance between manufacturing costs, ease of development, and software availability.
Agree,but still if Oculus will cost $600 which is way too much and plus PC which will run this at reasonable details this can be maybe hard pill for many people..
VIVE not sure what price point will be,but still we don't know who will be developing the games for them and if two or three studios and rest will be developing for Oculus and at the end you will end up with 3 VR headsets
Nvidia,I remember still bloody 3D Stereoscopic/Vision and where is this now,due this go with their VR I would be very cautious for now,but they I'm sure develop or they're developed their GameWorksVR
Regarding the Morpheus,this can be dark horse as PS4 install base is good to start and if price will be good enough,many people will adopt that sooner than above technologies,but as I said,we will see when all those VR starting to rolling out and mainly if games will be out which will use that in full potential
Thanks,Jura
Haftarun8
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 2013-08-07
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: 2013-08-07
#5223077 Posted on: 01/25/2016 10:23 PM
Finally - something that isn't just yet another stereoscopic headset.
@Kaarme
The image will be flat, but something like this should give realistic depth perception, though, I think it should've used 3 LCDs instead of 2. For example, imagine you're playing a racing game (with the camera in the driver's seat): The dashboard and steering wheel would be on the front LCD, objects immediately in front of you would be in the middle LCD, and any object you can't touch would be on the back LCD. This would be an incredibly powerful visual effect.
As for using LCDs, they don't really have another option. LCD is the only display technology that's actually see-through.
@schmidtbag
OLED is an emissive technology, and their panels can be transparent. Therefore you can (and they've already demonstrated this in many concept products and prototypes) have clear panels with individual light emitting pixels that still produce wider contrast and dynamic range than any LCD transparent or not, all on a paper thin, bendable transparent substrate. Pretty cool, no? The ONLY problem with OLED right now is that manufacturing volume and yield rates are not up to par with LCD yet. Once they are, it will actually be cheaper to produce these OLED panels vs. LCDs.
Finally - something that isn't just yet another stereoscopic headset.
@Kaarme
The image will be flat, but something like this should give realistic depth perception, though, I think it should've used 3 LCDs instead of 2. For example, imagine you're playing a racing game (with the camera in the driver's seat): The dashboard and steering wheel would be on the front LCD, objects immediately in front of you would be in the middle LCD, and any object you can't touch would be on the back LCD. This would be an incredibly powerful visual effect.
As for using LCDs, they don't really have another option. LCD is the only display technology that's actually see-through.
@schmidtbag
OLED is an emissive technology, and their panels can be transparent. Therefore you can (and they've already demonstrated this in many concept products and prototypes) have clear panels with individual light emitting pixels that still produce wider contrast and dynamic range than any LCD transparent or not, all on a paper thin, bendable transparent substrate. Pretty cool, no? The ONLY problem with OLED right now is that manufacturing volume and yield rates are not up to par with LCD yet. Once they are, it will actually be cheaper to produce these OLED panels vs. LCDs.
expo
Member
Posts: 59
Joined: 2014-08-10
Member
Posts: 59
Joined: 2014-08-10
#5223083 Posted on: 01/25/2016 10:49 PM
So how do you think the human eye works. The 'real' world is also a flat image on the retina. It's the brain that makes it 3D. A good VR lens just tricks the brain in making it think it is looking at a 3D image.
That is perfectly possible with LCD, even if it takes 100 LCD's to help the illusion.
The challenge of this generation VR glasses is to see what works best.
The image will always be flat on the retina. No amount of LCDs will change that.
So how do you think the human eye works. The 'real' world is also a flat image on the retina. It's the brain that makes it 3D. A good VR lens just tricks the brain in making it think it is looking at a 3D image.
That is perfectly possible with LCD, even if it takes 100 LCD's to help the illusion.
The challenge of this generation VR glasses is to see what works best.
Glidefan
Don Booze
Posts: 12500
Joined: 2000-05-23
Don Booze
Posts: 12500
Joined: 2000-05-23
#5223112 Posted on: 01/26/2016 12:26 AM
The problem is not that it's flat on the retina.
The problem with current headsets is that the eye convergence tells to the brain that the focus point is lets say 5 meters ahead, while the eye's lens tells that it's just a few CM away (because it's focusing at the LCD). And hence eye strain.
I think this is a study on how to do away with that.
The image will always be flat on the retina. No amount of LCDs will change that. Still, it's too bad they need to use the dusty old LCD technology in these goggles. I imagine that creates other drawbacks as well in addition to the lousier colours. Must have been a difficult choice when others use OLED, but since it's Nvidia, I guess they judged the more novel, proposed, benefits of the design worth trying.
The problem is not that it's flat on the retina.
The problem with current headsets is that the eye convergence tells to the brain that the focus point is lets say 5 meters ahead, while the eye's lens tells that it's just a few CM away (because it's focusing at the LCD). And hence eye strain.
I think this is a study on how to do away with that.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4570
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5223116 Posted on: 01/26/2016 12:49 AM
So how do you think the human eye works. The 'real' world is also a flat image on the retina. It's the brain that makes it 3D. A good VR lens just tricks the brain in making it think it is looking at a 3D image.
That is perfectly possible with LCD, even if it takes 100 LCD's to help the illusion.
The challenge of this generation VR glasses is to see what works best.
Eh, it's not quite that simple. For example, if you only have 1 eye, you still have the ability to quickly focus on objects a few inches away from your face to one several meters away in no time at all. This suggests we have some degree of depth perception without 2 eyes.
So, there are 2 ways to measure depth in vision - stereoscopic vision (where you analyze the differences between 2 images in order to measure depth) and focal point. Right now, headsets don't offer a way to measure the focal point, and this detracts from the realism. The focal point can be simulated, but that's in the hopes that the user isn't attempting to look at the out-of-focus object.
Kind of interesting when you really think about it though - we use a lot of GPU power to blur objects in realtime. Blurring is also a form of post-processing, which means it delays the output. If VR displays were designed to emulate varying focal points (like a hologram), we could disable blur and reduce GPU processing and latency. Might be pretty minimal, but not negligible.
So how do you think the human eye works. The 'real' world is also a flat image on the retina. It's the brain that makes it 3D. A good VR lens just tricks the brain in making it think it is looking at a 3D image.
That is perfectly possible with LCD, even if it takes 100 LCD's to help the illusion.
The challenge of this generation VR glasses is to see what works best.
Eh, it's not quite that simple. For example, if you only have 1 eye, you still have the ability to quickly focus on objects a few inches away from your face to one several meters away in no time at all. This suggests we have some degree of depth perception without 2 eyes.
So, there are 2 ways to measure depth in vision - stereoscopic vision (where you analyze the differences between 2 images in order to measure depth) and focal point. Right now, headsets don't offer a way to measure the focal point, and this detracts from the realism. The focal point can be simulated, but that's in the hopes that the user isn't attempting to look at the out-of-focus object.
Kind of interesting when you really think about it though - we use a lot of GPU power to blur objects in realtime. Blurring is also a form of post-processing, which means it delays the output. If VR displays were designed to emulate varying focal points (like a hologram), we could disable blur and reduce GPU processing and latency. Might be pretty minimal, but not negligible.
elkosith
Senior Member
Posts: 1401
Joined: 2008-01-11
Senior Member
Posts: 1401
Joined: 2008-01-11
#5223176 Posted on: 01/26/2016 05:37 AM
I always interested in 3D images since I was in school, and used to draw many simple crossed eye 3D images.
I like how now stereoscopic images develops into VR, which was only a dream when I was young.
I hope this technology gets better and cheaper, so I can afford one. Currently the best VR experience affordable by me is Google cardboard. I even watched some 3D movies using cardboard. Oculus, although I really want one, is still way too expensive for me.
I always interested in 3D images since I was in school, and used to draw many simple crossed eye 3D images.
I like how now stereoscopic images develops into VR, which was only a dream when I was young.
I hope this technology gets better and cheaper, so I can afford one. Currently the best VR experience affordable by me is Google cardboard. I even watched some 3D movies using cardboard. Oculus, although I really want one, is still way too expensive for me.
stereoman
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: 2011-12-06
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: 2011-12-06
#5223202 Posted on: 01/26/2016 07:40 AM
This looks really promising, by using lightfeilds it would make moving around the VR scene a lot more natural and reduce nausea would love to demo this the 3D effect must be incredible, I think the only drawback at this point is you have to render the scene with two lightfeilds which I imagine is a lot more intensive than with stereoscopic rendering.
This looks really promising, by using lightfeilds it would make moving around the VR scene a lot more natural and reduce nausea would love to demo this the 3D effect must be incredible, I think the only drawback at this point is you have to render the scene with two lightfeilds which I imagine is a lot more intensive than with stereoscopic rendering.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 182
Joined: 2010-03-25
Cannot wait to see these in action! VR is improving pretty darn quickly it seems! Engineers are awesome.