Oculus RIFT Head Mounted Display 90 Degree FOV

[Grayfox]

According to Apple, that cut-off is 326 PPI for a smartphone."
taken from this article:
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/ph...adness-or-clearly-the-next-big-thing--1260691

Apple says alot of things

They said the Power PC CPUs are better than intel, mac went to intel based CPUs.
Apple said they wont make a small ipad because it wont sell and it will be to hard to use, they made a small ipad and it is popular.
Apple said they wont make a wider iphone, there are rumors about a iphlablet, heck even their normal iphone has gotten wider and wider.

 

[bevo]

That Sony only has a 1920 x 1080 screen. The manufacturer claims 4k camera, not display. the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 has not yet been release but is rumored to have a 5.7in, 2K screen. There is yet to be a 4k screen of that size released for the obvious reason... why would anyone need a 4k resolution smartphone screen! It seems to be that the Rift and the other head mounted displays are the only reason to increase micro display resolution.
"Because smartphone screens are so physically tiny compared to TVs, the PPI is incredibly high – up to 530 on phones like the LG G3. Although that might sound like improvement, the human eye stops being able to make out a screen's individual pixels after a certain point – and after that point, increasing the resolution further won't really do anything of benefit. According to Apple, that cut-off is 326 PPI for a smartphone."
taken from this article:
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/ph...adness-or-clearly-the-next-big-thing--1260691

that article doesn't really apply to the rift though. With a phone you're not looking at it literally through a magnifying glass like you are with the rift.

 

[Paul33993]

that article doesn't really apply to the rift though. With a phone you're not looking at it literally through a magnifying glass like you are with the rift.

I don't think that was his point. You're right that PPI is irrelevant for VR. It's all about resolution (since smaller screens need more magnification).

I think he's simply asking what the incentive is for screen makers to go higher resolution? It's a good point. But they've boldly gone to 1440p and even that's of questionable use for a phone. Marketing wars know no bounds of stupidity. So hopefully they will be pushing 4k smartphones in 2 years. It's stupid. It's terrible for phone battery life. But it would certainly benefit VR (assuming GPU's can make significant gains in the next couple years).

EDIT: It's kind of why it would be good if the Samsung VR add-on was popular. If they could have video watching be popular with that add-on, Samsung would have some incentive to want to keep pushing resolution advances in that space.

 

[bevo]

I don't think that was his point. You're right that PPI is irrelevant for VR. It's all about resolution (since smaller screens need more magnification).

I think he's simply asking what the incentive is for screen makers to go higher resolution? It's a good point. But they've boldly gone to 1440p and even that's of questionable use for a phone. Marketing wars know no bounds of stupidity. So hopefully they will be pushing 4k smartphones in 2 years. It's stupid. It's terrible for phone battery life. But it would certainly benefit VR (assuming GPU's can make significant gains in the next couple years).

EDIT: It's kind of why it would be good if the Samsung VR add-on was popular. If they could have video watching be popular with that add-on, Samsung would have some incentive to want to keep pushing resolution advances in that space.

I see.

I don't really see why we are all still talking about cell phone screens anyway. Lucky palmer said right after facebook bought them that they would be making purposed screens specifically for the rift. I'm not sure that'll make it into the first consumer version but after they way he talked it sounded like that their plan was to have their own screens made specifically for VR for the consumer version of the rift.

More and more things carmack keeps hinting also sound like a curved screen is for sure going to be in it and shouldn't that help with not needing such a high resolution by letting them use different optics and not need to distort the image so much.

The way oculus is talking it doesn't seem like what the cell phone industry is doing limits what they can do at all anymore with the rift our that they are relying on their tech anymore.

Are there cell phone screens that can do 90 hz? It seems like they've said 90 is the minimum they would use in a consumer version.

 

[Paul33993]

/\

I know. I've been the one-man internet band banging about Carmack and the curved OLED clues.

Couple that with Lucky's interview at Gamescon, where he said the optics would be dramatically better in CV1, and I'm going to be positively stunned if CV1 isn't a curved 1440p OLED. I just don't see where else a dramatic optics improvement comes from.

I don't think it matters what cell phones drive their screen at. I'm not sure there are any limitations on OLED displays. You could probably update at 1000hz if you wanted to. You just need custom circuitry to drive it.

Here's hoping they show CV1 prototypes next month at Oculus Connect (and blow everyone away by it).

 

[bevo]

/\

I know. I've been the one-man internet band banging about Carmack and the curved OLED clues.

Couple that with Lucky's interview at Gamescon, where he said the optics would be dramatically better in CV1, and I'm going to be positively stunned if CV1 isn't a curved 1440p OLED. I just don't see where else a dramatic optics improvement comes from.

I don't think it matters what cell phones drive their screen at. I'm not sure there are any limitations on OLED displays. You could probably update at 1000hz if you wanted to. You just need custom circuitry to drive it.

Here's hoping they show CV1 prototypes next month at Oculus Connect (and blow everyone away by it).

The people claiming it has to be 4k amazes me. If this was the case they wouldn't even be making it now. Computer power just isn't there and even when it is won't the game devs be pushing graphics harder to where 4k would still be to difficult to run. 4k just doesn't make any sense at all in gaming. If they thought the rift needed 4k there is no way next year would be the release date.

I could be completely wrong about all this but from dk1 to dk2 was a huge leap in visuals and a small move in resolution. Going to 1440 is a much bigger step than them going to 1080. I bet 1440 would look pretty good. Maybe not perfect but goods enough to where only the people who are extremely critical will be unsatisfied.

 

[Mayaman]

I still stand by what I've said that FOV and using two screens is the solution to any issues with DK.

Two smaller screens of 1080p resolution or higher would be plenty. No split resolution. Increase the FOV and use two smaller dedicated micro oled screens. And you don't need 4k.

 

[lemansfanatic]

The point about cell phones was simply to point out thats where all the large companies product development research funding goes. Yes Carmack says he is going to develop a screen specifically for the rift, but how does that compare against the microscreen research done specifically for smartphones by the large corporate conglomerates. Who knows now that Facebook, Sony, and Microsoft are involved it adds an element of legitimacy to the need for higher resolution screens. If the big hitters are putting money into research and development, the industry has the might to achieve 4k screens sooner than later as compared to a few brilliant minds in a basement trying to hack 2k panels into 4k somehow.
Personally i wouldn't care if the first CV1 had to use two larger 2k screens placed farther away from the face to decrease the barn door effect. I could live with the discomfort of a heavier, clunkier thing on my head as long as the visuals (resolution,FOV and optics) were perfect. I don't need the first iteration of vr to be a polished product because the companies spent too much time worrying about form over function, i need it to work right. Then in the future when the panels get better and better the goggles can get smaller and smaller, and more comfortable etc.

 

[Paul33993]

The problem with screen door is resolution per degree. Size of the panel doesn't help any. Not really. Big screens don't help. Tiny micro screens don't help. Because in the end, they all get blown up to the same FOV. Smaller screens (with higher DPI) use higher magnification. Larger screens (with smaller DPI) use smaller magnification. In the end, it's all the same. They all have the same resolution per degree. Just some sizes have much more difficult optics issues than others. The whole six inch area tends to have the least amount of issues, optics wise. Although it clearly still as issues with DK2.

Sony's HMZ screens, for example, have huge optics issues if you really examine the device. It's why they're not using them in Morpheus. It has huge issues with a tiny 45 degree FOV. It's completely impossible, barring expensive and exotic optics, to magnify those to 90 - 120 degrees without the nose indent cutting into the view. I know it's why they ditched that method. It's an easy issue to identify if your really examine it.

 

[bevo]

I still stand by what I've said that FOV and using two screens is the solution to any issues with DK.

Two smaller screens of 1080p resolution or higher would be plenty. No split resolution. Increase the FOV and use two smaller dedicated micro oled screens. And you don't nee

The point about cell phones was simply to point out thats where all the large companies product development research funding goes. Yes Carmack says he is going to develop a screen specifically for the rift, but how does that compare against the microscreen research done specifically for smartphones by the large corporate conglomerates. Who knows now that Facebook, Sony, and Microsoft are involved it adds an element of legitimacy to the need for higher resolution screens. If the big hitters are putting money into research and development, the industry has the might to achieve 4k screens sooner than later as compared to a few brilliant minds in a basement trying to hack 2k panels into 4k somehow.
Personally i wouldn't care if the first CV1 had to use two larger 2k screens placed farther away from the face to decrease the barn door effect. I could live with the discomfort of a heavier, clunkier thing on my head as long as the visuals (resolution,FOV and optics) were perfect. I don't need the first iteration of vr to be a polished product because the companies spent too much time worrying about form over function, i need it to work right. Then in the future when the panels get better and better the goggles can get smaller and smaller, and more comfortable etc.

Wouldn't using 2 screens defeat the purpose of trying to make it possible to actually lock high end games to 90 fps?

 

[Mayaman]

Probably not

 

[lemansfanatic]

I hope it doesn't take developers like iRacing too long to implement controllable hands into the cockpit so we can activate the switches and other controls in our virtual cockpits.

And... lets be honest, it would be pretty sweet to give that guy who plowed into everyone in the first turn the bird

 

[Carlos]

I hope it doesn't take developers like iRacing too long to implement controllable hands into the cockpit so we can activate the switches and other controls in our virtual cockpits.

And... lets be honest, it would be pretty sweet to give that guy who plowed into everyone in the first turn the bird

 

[PLazarou]

A couple of relevant vids:

 

[lemansfanatic]

I had been wondering how developers would coordinate physical movement of the body into cyberspace beyond just head and torso while seated. There are several ways I have seen so far with 360 degree treadmill type devices that looked pretty awful TBH. Then I came across this video of a man talking about re-directed walking. Although this particular solution to movement in VR requires a large open area with lots of motion cameras, it just gets me excited to think about the possibilities of shrinking this to home use in the future. It never fails to fascinate me how easily the human brain can be tricked, and how the science of tricking our brains is becoming (or will become soon) a huge industry for entertainment as well as so much more. Watch this video, (skip ahead to 5:25 where he starts talking about redirected walking in a holodeck invironment), amazing.

 

[museumsteve]

Raceroom Racing Experience has DK2 support, sneaked in there quietly. It's early but does work
You can see how to get it running here

 

[insert coin]

Hey, you forgot to open the door!
The positional tracking is awesome!

 

[chromatic9]

John Carmack at Oculus Connect


starts 2 minutes in

Interesting what he says about 1440p

I looked at the pixel count per area on the DK2 a few weeks ago and compared to a normal 1080p monitor. For example a stop sign in Euro Truck sim at the same point contains 100 pixels for DK2 and 900 for the monitor. In the Dk2 its simply not readable, just a fuzzy blur. On the monitor its very clear. It would seem around 8k at current distortion plus optics would be needed to get around the 1080p screen figure. A subreddit did a calculation for screen door and came back with 8k.

For me I'd think a 4k screen , render at 2560x1440p with the use of various ways to cut the load down would be good point for me to get back into VR.

 

[chromatic9]

Hands on with Crescent Bay prototype

 

[lemansfanatic]

That thing looks like the only thing its missing is packaging. I think the fact that there are no more dev kits to be released is a pretty good indication that its pretty close to final form with minor tweaks (probably mostly to optimise it for people who don't own an Nvidia 980 card)

 

[super_gt]

 

[Pseudopod]

I really want an oculus rift, or one of the competitors that are going to pop up if it becomes a success. However, I would like a wider field of view, and also a higher resolution. 1920x1080 is really low when viewed at such a distance. Things like road signs with text on them are going to look like blur until you're 1/3rd the distance from them compared to when you could read it in real life .

With the sweeping action of human eyes, we have a "virtual" image in our heads that would require around 500 megapixels to perfectly recreate. Oculus rift at 1920x1080 only offers 2 MP. Granted, that 500+ figure is for when we have our full field of view, typically is more than 150 degrees vertically and over 120 horizontally. Naturally, the edges or our field of vision don't have nearly as much detail as the center, but as far as I know, we don't have displays with variable pixel density anyway, so whatever display we end up using will have to have a lot higher resolution than what our peripheral vision can offer anyway.

That said, I don't require anywhere near that 500MP figure before I buy it myself. I'll probably buy it even with just 1920x1080, and I'll probably be mostly satisfied when the 8k model comes out .

 

[0BZEN]

That said, I don't require anywhere near that 500MP figure before I buy it myself. I'll probably buy it even with just 1920x1080, and I'll probably be mostly satisfied when the 8k model comes out .

Yup.

Here are a couple of questions before anyone screams 4K CV1.

What GPU is gonna drive 4K/8K@100Hz? And what display?

Foveable rendering, with eye tracking maybe? Can current GPUs and APIs support that kind of technology?

What video standard, what controllers, and what cables can even deliver that amount of data with no latency and loss of quality?

How much power would that require, and does that mean extra, thicker cables going into the headset?

How about wirelessly, with sub-10ms latency?

There's a loooong way to go before the perfect VR headset, but it is at least in the realm of possibilities.

My crystal ball says CV1 is gonna be 1440p, with off-the-shelf components, at around $400. 1440p is already 4x the DK1, so you won't see me complain.

The real VR heasets, with eye tracking, IPD adjustments, quality and corrective optics would probably cost a whole lot more than that.

 

[Pseudopod]

I'm not worried about future GPUs being able to deliver 8k graphics. The only thing i think will pose a problem is wirelessly transferring 8k with sub-frame latency. I doubt the cables will get significantly thicker from just doing 8k graphics.

 

[AussieStig]

Hey guys,



This is the answer for everyone that wants to play with all the pretty buttons and knobs on their racing dashboards. I think this is the type of technology that will help a lot of fence sitters to jump that fence and go for the VR option, or in other words take the green pill and see where it leads

Cheers, AussieStig

 

[superbike81]

It's cool for sure, but it's going to take a great deal of work for the devs to make cockpits interactive. I don't think we'll see it for a long time unfortunately. The DK2 is already fairly rare (compared to the whole userbase) for racing games, even fewer will have this, so I think it will be tough to talk the devs into spending the time implementing it.

Also with how far away we'll have to reach our hands away from our head, I wonder if the camera will even be able to track it.

Imagine trying to get to the buttons on the center console portion. Will have to stare right at it which isn't going to work.

For the forseeable future I think the solution to people wanting button boxes and stuff like that is going to be advanced steering wheels with 15+ functions as well as a program like Voice Attack.

 

[Stephanos82]

I'm kind of disappointed and actually thinking of selling my dk2.. The lack of clarity in the distance is a deal breaker - seriously you can barely see a few metres ahead!

Edit: Am I doing anything wrong? :/

 

[museumsteve]

I'm kind of disappointed and actually thinking of selling my dk2.. The lack of clarity in the distance is a deal breaker - seriously you can barely see a few metres ahead!

Edit: Am I doing anything wrong? :/

Depends what game you are talking about. I play AC, pCARS and R3E regularly and love them in the Rift.

 

[Pseudopod]

I'm kind of disappointed and actually thinking of selling my dk2.. The lack of clarity in the distance is a deal breaker - seriously you can barely see a few metres ahead!

Edit: Am I doing anything wrong? :/

That's the kind of stuff I was talking about earlier. There really isn't any way to solve that other than increasing the resolution significantly. To 4k for example.

 

[museumsteve]

That's the kind of stuff I was talking about earlier. There really isn't any way to solve that other than increasing the resolution significantly. To 4k for example.

Indeed the resolution will increase with the first consumer version but with DK2 there is certainly more than a few metres of clear vision in the racers I play (and many other happy Rifters) unless something is not setup correctly.
Would be good to know which particular games Stephanos82 is talking about.