Posted by
deadgenome -.,.-*`*-.,.-*`*- on
Feb 22, 2008; 7:14pm
URL: https://forum.world.st/Re-hardware-pixels-aren-t-hardware-pixels-tp128969p128980.html
... (here I AM a newbie, and if DeadGenome you think
> eyetracking could be used to overcome that ugly "box" effect, well, I am
> quite happy to think that GOOD HMDs can be done... but again, I would
> like to see such stuff in stores and not only in labs. It's a lot of
> years now that I am waiting :) ).
I was originally looking at this idea to do a system with a limited
fov and was looking at the fibre optic just to shift the beamer into
the base unit which makes the whole system easier to make sportsproof
(which I thought was important to get this sort of tech into the
commercial market) and gets all the bulky stuff off the head so that
it could be integrated into something like a pair of sunglasses.
Design 1 was using a fibre bundle, 1 fibre per pixel, but I realised
that this was a hell of a lot of fibre and would be a *female dog* to
align with the DLP as well as needing a fat umbilical, then I
remembered a program I had seen demonstrating single fibre endoscopes
and realised that I could run the same concept in reverse. Once I had
got to the concept of moving the fibre to get the scan pattern, it was
then a simple step to realising that by moving the scan pattern
around, that eye tracking could be used to achieve a very wide fov
indeed while keeping the beamer resolution down to an acceptable
level.
> Want to try something else with eyetracking? Exploit the difference of
> resolution between foveal and peripheral vision: track where one is
> looking at and use more powerful rendering techniques to draw much
> better images (and not just higher perceived resolution) only where
> needed. Sit in front of a very big, hi-res LCD display, do some
> eyetracking, and do real-time raytracing+radiosity+all the best
> rendering you can imagine on a 300 pixel radius, just where you are
> looking, and draw everything else in a very fast and rough manner. I
> believe you could achieve interesting frame rates and perceived quality
> of images with something like this, which is more interesting than just
> "multiplexing pixels" IMHO.
your idea idea is great... if the sweep on my system is then made a
little wider and also uses optics in the beamer to make the sweep
towards the outside have less resolution than the center (also the
center will have to be brighter lit to compensate for the fact that
the fibre is moving fastest at that point) and combine this with your
rendering concepts, we could be well on the way to something that
could produce insanely good graphics off a belt worn unit.
Another addendum to this is the idea of putting a couple of cameras
facing forwards on the frame of the sunglasses... these could either
be CCDs on the frames themselves, or a couple more vibrating fibres
leading to CCDs in the base unit... as long as the cameras/fibres are
able to see UV, visible and IR (this may require more than one fibre
per cam to do cheaply) and have a range of filters to cut out unwanted
frequencies - ta-da... a predator HUD... :) this could also be
combined with a GPS plugged into the base unit to give a top down
quake style map... very useful for snowboarding in the dark.
This should make a damn good AR system, however to further extend the
idea, just put lcd shutters into the sunglasses to shut out the real
world when required (possibly triggered to dangerous events so that
you never lose your cool by seeing something that could possibly upset
or alarm you - thanks D.A.) and we then have a damn good VR system as
well..
<< meta-meta-copy consider-this-section-to-be-a-quote="false" >>
>
> Deadgenome: I meta-copy you:
>
> Legal Note - The content and concepts conveyed in this email are covered by the latest version of the Gnu GPL -
>
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html<</ meta-meta-copy >>