Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Tech Bits

View
15 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

15. Re: NOT 4K May 3, 2013, 04:36 eRe4s3r
 
Am gonna assume more advanced technology will use direct to eye light projectors instead of screens. It would make the device a lot smaller and you'd not need screens...  
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: NOT 4K May 2, 2013, 13:52 Beamer
 
Having screens that close to your eyes will always create fatigue. It's a simple biological fact.

That fatigue can be minimized, and likely is on the Rift. Can you do 2 hours with it no problem? Undoubtedly. Can you do 5 straight on it like I somehow managed the first Sunday I had XCOM installed? Very unlikely. But how often do you do that, particularly in the games that benefit most from the device?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: NOT 4K May 2, 2013, 13:43 eRe4s3r
 
Beamer wrote on May 2, 2013, 08:42:
gray wrote on May 2, 2013, 08:19:
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 16:42:
Well I don't care for the people who can't use it But I would use it if I could.. even if I could only just use it 2 hours a day... so what? 2 hours a day of perfect virtual immersion... that'd be worth it.

Can go as long as you want in the Oculus Rift, it's focused at infinity so no eye fatigue. As to other people, 5-10 yrs the plan is for most people to have one in the form of glasses (replacing their cell phone). Think late 80s-90s cell phone uptake.

Kinda FUD there. It's focused at infinity, but it's still a light emitting screen an inch from your eyeballs. That's fatigue.
Then there's blur. That's fatigue.
Then there's that it's impossible to "focus at infinity." You're still looking at things at different distances virtually. That's fatigue.
The display will have some strobing noticeable at that distance. That's fatigue.
The color gamut is less than the eye can see. That's fatigue.

Bottom line - there will be fatigue, no matter what they claim.

Which is why I think this tech doesn't work with what the Occulus is offering... there need to be some serious advances to get it to 100% eye compatibility and before that happens the RIFT will be a device that blows you away and makes you sick in one way or another. And as someone who wears glasses, there is also the compatibility with bad eyesight that needs to be considered.

Anyway, I think the technology is not there yet. Especially not if they use phone displays. We need custom VR displays with different illumination and display technology.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: NOT 4K May 2, 2013, 08:42 Beamer
 
gray wrote on May 2, 2013, 08:19:
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 16:42:
Well I don't care for the people who can't use it But I would use it if I could.. even if I could only just use it 2 hours a day... so what? 2 hours a day of perfect virtual immersion... that'd be worth it.

Can go as long as you want in the Oculus Rift, it's focused at infinity so no eye fatigue. As to other people, 5-10 yrs the plan is for most people to have one in the form of glasses (replacing their cell phone). Think late 80s-90s cell phone uptake.

Kinda FUD there. It's focused at infinity, but it's still a light emitting screen an inch from your eyeballs. That's fatigue.
Then there's blur. That's fatigue.
Then there's that it's impossible to "focus at infinity." You're still looking at things at different distances virtually. That's fatigue.
The display will have some strobing noticeable at that distance. That's fatigue.
The color gamut is less than the eye can see. That's fatigue.

Bottom line - there will be fatigue, no matter what they claim.

This comment was edited on May 2, 2013, 08:54.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: NOT 4K May 2, 2013, 08:19 gray
 
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 16:42:
Well I don't care for the people who can't use it But I would use it if I could.. even if I could only just use it 2 hours a day... so what? 2 hours a day of perfect virtual immersion... that'd be worth it.

Can go as long as you want in the Oculus Rift, it's focused at infinity so no eye fatigue. As to other people, 5-10 yrs the plan is for most people to have one in the form of glasses (replacing their cell phone). Think late 80s-90s cell phone uptake.
 
Avatar 54867
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 16:42 eRe4s3r
 
Well I don't care for the people who can't use it But I would use it if I could.. even if I could only just use it 2 hours a day... so what? 2 hours a day of perfect virtual immersion... that'd be worth it.  
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 14:24 Beamer
 
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 12:43:
Beamer wrote on May 1, 2013, 11:34:
4320p is 8kuhdtv, not 4k. None of the 4k standards go that high. Full Aperture 4K is below that.

Standards.. bah

While we are on that. Give me 7680 x 4320 screens and I will shut up and call that 4k screens (probably needing a $4k GPU just to drive em stable at 60hz.... )

I am personally more interested in proper VR headsets... which are going to completely obliterate screens. You don't need bigger screens once you can have VR headsets with native (eye) resolution. At least for work or ... games.

And yes, I am strongly convinced VR headsets are going to get their big debut in about 10 or so years. ^^

Yeah, I suppose we can say "standards."

Disagreed on VR headseats. Too much eye fatigue. No way to make it cheap enough that a family of 4 can all watch at once (and what if they have friends over!?) The big reason, though, is too many people simply get no benefit from it. There's a fairly substantial number of people that don't have good stereoscopic vision. There's no reason to make them wear a headset.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 12:43 eRe4s3r
 
Beamer wrote on May 1, 2013, 11:34:
4320p is 8kuhdtv, not 4k. None of the 4k standards go that high. Full Aperture 4K is below that.

Standards.. bah

While we are on that. Give me 7680 x 4320 screens and I will shut up and call that 4k screens (probably needing a $4k GPU just to drive em stable at 60hz.... )

I am personally more interested in proper VR headsets... which are going to completely obliterate screens. You don't need bigger screens once you can have VR headsets with native (eye) resolution. At least for work or ... games.

And yes, I am strongly convinced VR headsets are going to get their big debut in about 10 or so years. ^^

This comment was edited on May 1, 2013, 12:51.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 12:30 eRe4s3r
 
nin wrote on May 1, 2013, 11:32:
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 11:25:
it's 2160p vs 1080p so It's not 4K (4320p)

The manufacturers noticed the problem of advertising something that they are more than twice away from and renamed it, to QuadFullHD or QFHD

To rephrase, these screens are QFHD. They are NOT 4k

4K screens are still several decades away.


Here's one you'll love. Companies are using a 4K master for new blu rays. But they label the package "Mastered in 4K" and "Optimized for 4K Ultra HD tvs" (scroll down to the bottom to see the box are). But it's still a 1080P picture.


That's actually hilarious in a bad way ,)
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Tech Bits May 1, 2013, 11:37 Mr. Tact
 
Looking around it seems 3840x2160 is Quad Full HD; and 4096x2160 is being called 4K. And yeah, considering current HD is referred to by the horizontal resolution, namely 720 or 1080, calling either of those standards 4K is a straight up marketing lie. Not that I was really paying attention to it anyway. And despite naysayers commenting it's completely unnecessary, I'm sure it will reach the TV showrooms eventually.  
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 11:34 Beamer
 
4320p is 8kuhdtv, not 4k. None of the 4k standards go that high. Full Aperture 4K is below that.  
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 11:32 nin
 
eRe4s3r wrote on May 1, 2013, 11:25:
it's 2160p vs 1080p so It's not 4K (4320p)

The manufacturers noticed the problem of advertising something that they are more than twice away from and renamed it, to QuadFullHD or QFHD

To rephrase, these screens are QFHD. They are NOT 4k

4K screens are still several decades away.


Here's one you'll love. Companies are using a 4K master for new blu rays. But they label the package "Mastered in 4K" and "Optimized for 4K Ultra HD tvs" (scroll down to the bottom to see the box are). But it's still a 1080P picture.

 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. NOT 4K May 1, 2013, 11:25 eRe4s3r
 
it's 2160p vs 1080p so It's not 4K (4320p)

The manufacturers noticed the problem of advertising something that they are more than twice away from and renamed it, to QuadFullHD or QFHD

To rephrase, these screens are QFHD. They are NOT 4k

4K screens are still several decades away.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Tech Bits May 1, 2013, 11:10 Mr. Tact
 
While I agree that many companies do questionable things to avoid paying taxes, Apple's bond sale doesn't quite qualify in my book. They have simply delayed any taxes resulting from returning overseas profits to the US, they haven't really avoided them, yet.  
Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Tech Bits May 1, 2013, 11:06 Cutter
 
This BS Apple is doing is a perfect example of tax shields that need to be eliminated.
 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo