[QUOTE=Orkel;46985420]Not a launch thing, it'll be released during the 10's "timeframe". So anytime before they end official support (like they did with 7 just a while back). Around 1-2 years before we get it I bet
And note that this is still a prototype. When you compare something like the Rift DK1 with the newest Crescent Bay version the difference is enormous. HoloLens (fucking corny name lmao) will be much improved when it comes out.[/QUOTE]
I'm mostly impressed that they manage to display something not purely additively. (Assuming that presentation video is accurate.)
That narrator voice instantly made me skeptical for some reason.
I'm a huge fan of VR and AR, but this live presentation video suuuuuucked. That guy sucks. Specially when they used that real quadcopter, yeah fuck you that has nothing to do with the actual device and that's not happening by just owning a 3d printer. Not until 3d printers can do motors, circuit boards and batteries. Not to mention it looked staged as hell, though i'm not sure if it was.
[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;46986235]Nice CG concept video. I'll come back when it's actually happening.[/QUOTE]
There's a live presentation of it, though?
[QUOTE=Tamschi;46986245]I'm mostly impressed that they manage to display something not purely additively. (Assuming that presentation video is accurate.)[/QUOTE]
I've always wondered if it would be practical to have a second layer of liquid crystal display that increases its opacity behind an object, think of the segments on a calculator/clock LCD that go from transparent to black, and turn that all into pixels
[t]http://i.imgur.com/sdfT9HC.png[/t]
[QUOTE=mr apple;46984912]I'm more interested in seeing an actual consumer product, not fake cgi bullshit they made for the ad.
Like things they could actually tell consumers are; how good the tracking is; how it's not a gimmick.
Stupid ass companies aren't innovating, they're just advertising.[/QUOTE]
According to previews from the actual press event the stuff shown in the ad was not bullshit at all. Like the whole nasa thing works [I]exactly[/I] as shown
Obviously it doesn't look as super crisp and CGI as it does in the trailer, and the motorcycle thing is currently (probably) bullshit concept-art level stuff, but for the most part it turns out it all checks out.
I think the most obivous thing though is the FoV isn't as infinite as the ad makes it look. Engadget says imagine a rectangle infront of your vision that you see holograms through, and that is how it currently looks/works. And because its inherently holographic glass, nothing is 100% opaque (but it can get pretty deeply opaque).
so uhh, the future is now?
The pipe demo is a decent idea that can bring AR from being more-less a gimmick into commercial, useful telepresence.
I wonder if they'd incorporate a winking system. Throw in some low-res cameras facing towards your eyes and then set up custom actions when you wink left or right. Opening menus, right clicking, etc.
I mean you'd probably get RSEye (you're welcome) but it would be hella neat
for some reason seeing that the guy had a fake virtual dog at the end of the video made me sad
[QUOTE=dai;46987932]I've always wondered if it would be practical to have a second layer of liquid crystal display that increases its opacity behind an object, think of the segments on a calculator/clock LCD that go from transparent to black, and turn that all into pixels
[t]http://i.imgur.com/sdfT9HC.png[/t][/QUOTE]
you eyes can't see that close in front, your vision focus past the point like a camera's focus.
You can use projectors and change the focus to go right into your eyes, look at google glass.
[QUOTE=Ugrdbflasars1;46985195][video=youtube;RCCXZ8ErVag]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCCXZ8ErVag[/video]
Not sure really how much of this is CGI but this demo makes it look really convincing...[/QUOTE]
None of that is CGI, If you saw the shot with the camera, you'd see that she was shooting through a HoloLens.
edit: Pic:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/hG92r5s.png[/IMG]
The Verge said that when they did the 'Mars' demo, as shown in the preview commercial, it was pretty spot on, and scarily convincing.
[QUOTE=Ithon;46990182]you eyes can't see that close in front, your vision focus past the point like a camera's focus.
You can use projectors and change the focus to go right into your eyes, look at google glass.[/QUOTE]
that'd be the problem, but opacity fading behind the projected images would be better blurry than not at all. A great example of that kind of secondary opacity is actually used well in Elite Dangerous, a lot of the UI that you need to read fine details from will actually have a darkened gradient behind it to increase readability while still letting you see through it. It's not pixel for pixel, but it's extremely handy in this use case
[img]http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/c9d9efa379595731066982ff3ea2cf2a/200719575/Elite+2-4.jpg[/img]
I wouldn't mind wearing glasses if I got to see badass holographs because of it. Hell, I'd even wear something as dorky as Google Glass if I could have that.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;46989959]I wonder if they'd incorporate a winking system. Throw in some low-res cameras facing towards your eyes and then set up custom actions when you wink left or right. Opening menus, right clicking, etc.
I mean you'd probably get RSEye (you're welcome) but it would be hella neat[/QUOTE]
How would it differentiate between blinking and intentional blinking?
[QUOTE=Warship;46990518]How would it differentiate between blinking and intentional blinking?[/QUOTE]
holding your eyes closed probably, much like how the demo user had to hold her hand out for certain things.
This would be fucking amazing for like a turned based game like Xcom.
Imagine the level loading on a table and you get a full birds eye view for this shit. Fuck that would be amazing. Easy to control as well.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46990741]This would be fucking amazing for like a turned based game like Xcom.
Imagine the level loading on a table and you get a full birds eye view for this shit. Fuck that would be amazing. Easy to control as well.[/QUOTE]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/WFye0e8.jpg[/t]
kinda
Imagine playing tabletop simulator on this.
[QUOTE=Toro;46990183]None of that is CGI, If you saw the shot with the camera, you'd see that she was shooting through a HoloLens.
[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/FPMiufM.png[/img]
microsoft's glasses tint the outer glass part like sunglasses so everything is darker, which is their workaround.
Some info on the insides by a "source" so take it with a grain of salt:
[url]http://www.pcworld.com/article/2874352/microsofts-hololens-uses-unreleased-intel-atom-chip.html[/url]
[quote]Microsoft’s stunning HoloLens holographic computer, which stole the show at this week’s Windows 10 event, runs on an unreleased Intel Atom chip code-named Cherry Trail, according to a source familiar with the hardware.
Cherry Trail is a successor to Intel’s current set of tablet and low-end PC chips code-named Bay Trail. Cherry Trail is smaller, has more features and is faster than Bay Trail, and is able to fit within the curved contours of the HoloLens. The chip is made using Intel’s latest 14-nanometer manufacturing process, which is considered the most advanced in the semiconductor industry.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=Toro;46990794]Imagine playing tabletop simulator on this.[/QUOTE]
tabletop simulator has castAR (an AR device) as a stretch goal. I know some of the people behind castAR, which is why I know the AR space well because it's a hard problem to tackle and is complex when you get into detail.
[QUOTE=Ithon;46991103][img]http://i.imgur.com/FPMiufM.png[/img][/QUOTE]
my guess is they're using the base of the actual glasses for the area tracking information, and routing the glasses' own simulated 3D objects in to be merged within the camera feed for best visual feedback
[QUOTE=Warship;46990518]How would it differentiate between blinking and intentional blinking?[/QUOTE]
That's why it would use winks instead of blinks
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH0eJY95rMY[/media]
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("reaction video/just got off image macro ban" - dai))[/highlight]
I'm somewhat optimistic about this and hopefully universities will get hands on those at some point like with Oculus rift.
I'd really like to experience the future, even if it's not polished yet.
This is probably a step in a really right direction.
[editline]23rd January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Maloof?;46991505]That's why it would use winks instead of blinks[/QUOTE]
You could use left eye to point mouse, and closing and opening right eye to click/click+hold etc.
[QUOTE=creec;46991657]I'm somewhat optimistic about this and hopefully universities will get hands on those at some point like with Oculus rift.
I'd really like to experience the future, even if it's not polished yet.
This is probably a step in a really right direction.
[editline]23rd January 2015[/editline]
You could use left eye to point mouse, and closing and opening right eye to click/click+hold etc.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I do hope they have eye tracking. Pointing using the head-neck is neat but I imagine you'd stress the muscles after a while, whereas eye tracking would be way more responsive
[QUOTE=dai;46991459]my guess is they're using the base of the actual glasses for the area tracking information, and routing the glasses' own simulated 3D objects in to be merged within the camera feed for best visual feedback[/QUOTE]
hence why I said overlay, guess people misunderstood what I meant.
Though at first I thought they were using the tracking on the glasses as well, but I notice now there's a xbone kinect below the lens. I think they strapped an older prototype to a camera, during valve days they demoed the older VR headset that used QR codes then IR leds because it was more mature making it better to figure out and technical difficulty during such a presentation.
Regardless of your opinion, this is some very, very impressive tech.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.