[QUOTE=Vintage Thatguy;41004933]i have perfect vision, i've been curious as to what other people see
it sounds cool[/QUOTE]
Think everything is blurry beyond 5 meters and really far away it looks like a water painting.
[IMG]http://www.eyecarekerry.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/astigmatism-1.jpg[/IMG]
That is what i see, its a recreation of a horizontal astigmatism.
[QUOTE=Darkslicer;41004213]Well I can't see far because my eyes are bad but close things are sharp and normal (near sighted?) so wearing the occulus should not be a problem without glasses right? The screen is close to the eye = sharp for people having problems seeing far.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't work like that unfortunately.
[editline]12th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Vintage Thatguy;41004933]i have perfect vision, i've been curious as to what other people see
it sounds cool[/QUOTE]
Image bad camera focus or depth of field, that's what I see without my glasses after 15-20cm
[QUOTE=redBadger;41007367]This thing is a great concept but honestly it looks like ass and for me personally, I'd get a headache after 5 minutes of wearing the damn thing[/QUOTE]
The OR is actually less intensive on your eyes than using a monitor because for a monitor you have to focus on it while on the OR your eyes are relaxed and focused on infiity. AKA pretty much impossible to get headaches.
But you might get really badly motion sick :v:
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;41008439]It doesn't work like that unfortunately.[/QUOTE]
Incorrect actually, the optics will allow you to focus properly on it. Its like looking down a rifle scope and being able to see clearly even if you have poor long range vision. It wont be perfect, but it will still help and possibly even end up giving me, whos 20/200 without correction, readable text.
[QUOTE=pebkac;41003784]What you said makes exactly zero sense. Even if it's a very small screen, it's still going to cover a large part of your field of view in the Oculus. A 5" screen 20cm from your eyes is basically the same as a 50" TV 2 metres away from you.[/QUOTE]
I really doubt this'll be a major issue though with the OR unless you are very elitist about your display tech. Especially considering the vast majority of people didn't even really care about screendoor effect with the current dev kits as it loses a lot of noticability if you actually -use- the OR instead of analyzing it. Considering from all accounts the screen door effect is almost impossible to see on the 1080p model unless you seriously squint for it (aka searching for the pixels, which you can do on any display right now) I seriously doubt it's going to be anything like seeing a 50" TV a few inches away from you.
If you want to have fun with experimenting what the screendoor effect actually looks like, trying going up to an actual screendoor which (if each hole was one pixel) has an even worse "pixel density" than the current dev kit. When you focus beyond the screen, you still know its there but it's virtually inperceptable when you focus on things going on outside unless you keep reminding yourself that you are looking through a screen (and honestly, who does that?).
Also, FWI 1080p on a 5" screen isn't anything like veiwing a 50" 1080p TV from a foot away (especially since TV's aren't like monitors, but lets just assume for the sake of argument that its a 50" monitor). At all. The pixel density is actually on par of what you'd see from a normal 1080p 24" or so monitor from a standard monitor view distance away. And you don't really notice "individual pixels and a screen door effect" on standard monitors unless you are being hugely OCD and anal about it.
[QUOTE=ArcticRevrus;41008719]Incorrect actually, the optics will allow you to focus properly on it. Its like looking down a rifle scope and being able to see clearly even if you have poor long range vision. It wont be perfect, but it will still help and possibly even end up giving me, whos 20/200 without correction, readable text.[/QUOTE]
You're wrong.
[url]http://www.oculusvr.com/blog/behind-the-scenes-of-the-pilot-run/[/url]
[quote]If you have great vision (or you wear contacts), your vision inside the Rift will match your vision in real life. You’ll use eyecup set A.
If you’re farsighted, you’ll have no vision problems in the Rift because [B][U]the optics are focused at infinity[/U][/B] (which makes your brain think it’s looking at something far away). You’ll also use set A.
If you’re nearsighted, the additional eyecups, B and C, allow you to see inside the Rift as if you were wearing glasses. Again, this is because the lens cups change the focal distance. If you’re moderately nearsighted, you’ll use set B. If you’re very nearsighted, you’ll use set C[/quote]
If you can't see far, you will need correction. If you can't see close, you're fine.
[QUOTE=KorJax;41009288]I really doubt this'll be a major issue though with the OR unless you are very elitist about your display tech. Especially considering the vast majority of people didn't even really care about screendoor effect with the current dev kits as it loses a lot of noticability if you actually -use- the OR instead of analyzing it. Considering from all accounts the screen door effect is almost impossible to see on the 1080p model unless you seriously squint for it (aka searching for the pixels, which you can do on any display right now) I seriously doubt it's going to be anything like seeing a 50" TV a few inches away from you.
If you want to have fun with experimenting what the screendoor effect actually looks like, trying going up to an actual screendoor which (if each hole was one pixel) has an even worse "pixel density" than the current dev kit. When you focus beyond the screen, you still know its there but it's virtually inperceptable when you focus on things going on outside unless you keep reminding yourself that you are looking through a screen (and honestly, who does that?).
Also, FWI 1080p on a 5" screen isn't anything like veiwing a 50" 1080p TV from a foot away (especially since TV's aren't like monitors, but lets just assume for the sake of argument that its a 50" monitor). At all. The pixel density is actually on par of what you'd see from a normal 1080p 24" or so monitor from a standard monitor view distance away. And you don't really notice "individual pixels and a screen door effect" on standard monitors unless you are being hugely OCD and anal about it.[/QUOTE]
It's pretty easy to notice the pixels on a 24" 1920×1080 monitor, but it's a decent resolution if you aren't specifically looking for them. But the thing here is, the Oculus is supposed to have a 90 degrees by 110 degrees FOV, for a normal monitor to cover such a large part of your view, it'd need to be very close to your face. And let's not forget that each eye only gets 960×1080 pixels with the Oculus, I'd say that's just about the bare minimum acceptable resolution. You'd need a much higher resolution panel in it to even match the sharpness of a standard monitor at a normal viewing distance.
[QUOTE=pebkac;41009904]It's pretty easy to notice the pixels on a 24" 1920×1080 monitor, but it's a decent resolution if you aren't specifically looking for them. But the thing here is, the Oculus is supposed to have a 90 degrees by 110 degrees FOV, for a normal monitor to cover such a large part of your view, it'd need to be very close to your face. And let's not forget that each eye only gets 960×1080 pixels with the Oculus, I'd say that's just about the bare minimum acceptable resolution. You'd need a much higher resolution panel in it to even match the sharpness of a standard monitor at a normal viewing distance.[/QUOTE]
You have to keep in mind that the OR isn't just a screen, it's also working with lenses and head tracking and a bunch of other shit to make whatever you see as perceptively "real" as possible. To compare them to monitor standards doesn't make much sense to me.
And of course for a normal monitor to cover such a large part of your view it'd have to be close. Which is why monitors are used at a distance of a few feet away instead of up close (otherwise they'd have pixel densities much higher). 1080p on a 5" screen is considerably much more pixel-dense than 1080p on a 24" monitor. And the OR doesn't just throw a screen right in front of you, it creates the 110 degree FoV through optics and software imaging displayed on that 5" screen.
For fun, let's figure this out. (I currently use a "1080p" [really just 1200p but for all intents and purposes lets assume 16:9] at about 4 feet away).
[url]http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html[/url]
Your typical 24" monitor at 1080p (pretty standard, high-def high-quality display) has a DPI of around 91.75. That's around 92 pixels per square inch.
If we shrink that resolution to 5", the DPI of the display would be around 440 DPI
That's about 4.5X more pixel dense than a high quality monitor, which means you can get about 4.5X closer to that display before you start noticing the pixels any more than you would on a monitor at standard viewing distance (and honestly, it's not quite that simple, as clarity with vision isn't something that is linearly comparable like this - it'll be a lot harder to see a pixel 1" away from a 400 DPI display than to see a pixel 4" away from a 100 DPI display).
I can sit back about 1.5 feet away on my 1080p 24" monitor before the pixels begin to become visible and I can start discerning them individually. Beyond 1.5 feet I lose the ability to properly discern a pixel, as they begin to blend in according to my perceptions. And this is assuming the screen is showing something that is static (if there was lots of movement going on that would be a wholly different matter, I'd probably have to get in even closer).
Lets assume my eyes perceive detail linearly no matter how close or far away I am (i.e. something that takes up 1 degree of my FoV would be just as clear a foot away as it would be if it were just an inch away from my eyes if that FoV was maintained). That means the minimum threshold where I can even begin to perceive individual pixels on a 440DPI 5" display would be 4" away from my face. Beyond 4", the pixels would be impossible to perceive as being there and closer than 4" you could begin to start looking at pixels if you really focus on them.
Now I don't know about you, but 4" away from you face is really damn close, and likely closer than what the OR is displayed to you at. At the very least, it might be close enough to begin to see pixels if you really try, but even then this is assuming your eyes can even properly focus on a pixel at that distance, that you are looking at completely still imagery, that you aren't using the lenses built into the OR, that you aren't doing headtracking to trick your perceptions, etc.
In otherwords, it's pretty ridiculous to assume that DPI of the OR on a 1080p 5" screen will ever be a real issue for 99.9% of users who use the device.
[QUOTE=KorJax;41010385]You have to keep in mind that the OR isn't just a screen, it's also working with lenses and head tracking and a bunch of other shit to make whatever you see as perceptively "real" as possible. To compare them to monitor standards doesn't make much sense to me.
And of course for a normal monitor to cover such a large part of your view it'd have to be close. Which is why monitors are used at a distance of a few feet away instead of up close (otherwise they'd have pixel densities much higher). 1080p on a 5" screen is considerably much more pixel-dense than 1080p on a 24" monitor. And the OR doesn't just throw a screen right in front of you, it creates the 110 degree FoV through optics and software imaging displayed on that 5" screen.
For fun, let's figure this out. (I currently use a "1080p" [really just 1200p but for all intents and purposes lets assume 16:9] at about 4 feet away).
[url]http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html[/url]
Your typical 24" monitor at 1080p (pretty standard, high-def high-quality display) has a DPI of around 91.75. That's around 92 pixels per square inch.
If we shrink that resolution to 5", the DPI of the display would be around 440 DPI
[/QUOTE]
Comparing the DPI makes no sense here exactly because you're viewing these devices at different distances. The only sensible comparison really is angular resolution. And 1080 pixels spread over ~40° of your FOV is going to look way better than than 1080 pixels over 110° whatever way you slice it. My phone's 1280×768 screen looks way sharper than my 24" 1920×1200 monitor during normal use, but if I put the phone right into my face, that won't be the case anymore.
[QUOTE=KorJax;41010385]
That's about 4.5X more pixel dense than a high quality monitor, which means you can get about 4.5X closer to that display before you start noticing the pixels any more than you would on a monitor at standard viewing distance (and honestly, it's not quite that simple, as clarity with vision isn't something that is linearly comparable like this - it'll be a lot harder to see a pixel 1" away from a 400 DPI display than to see a pixel 4" away from a 100 DPI display).[/QUOTE]
You can't discern pixels from that close simply because the human eye isn't meant for such short distance viewing. That's why the Oculus has adjustable optics to make you able to get a good focus from up close. A blurry vision would be even worse than pixelated vision.
The upgrade to 1080p is a step in the right direction, and it's probably "good enough" considering all of the advantages over not having a VR headset, but it's going to need a lot more to be on par with other devices out there today.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.