6 ms·
Have you used any optical see-through HMDs? There's heaps, and they all have no problem displaying text. If you look at the spec sheet for the BT-300 for exampl
by guycook 9y ago
Have you used any optical see-through HMDs? There's heaps, and they all have no problem displaying text. If you look at the spec sheet for the BT-300 for example [0] you'll see "Virtual screen size: 80" support (virtual viewing distance 5m)", or in other words you need to focus your eyes five meters away to see the display sharply, at which point it will appear to take up 80in of diagonal space in the real world (don't know why they mixed the units like this though). I'm pretty sure most people could read text off a 720p 80" screen 5m away.
As for not making things dark, yes that's true. You can of course tint the glasses or use an extra layer to darken the outside world, or you can really crank the brightness causes the user's iris to contract creating the impression of higher contrast in the dark regions. Best option is to combine the approaches with a camera observing the environment, which can even be done on a per-pixel basis as in the paper I helped write [1]
As for power/performance, it's all a matter of desired form factor. If you don't mind a cable to an arm or hip attached android device, you can have everything you need right now. Alternatively there's the Hololens style huge headset. But if you want slimline glasses yes you'll be waiting a few years.
A lot a people are bearish on the future of AR and I can appreciate that viewpoint, but the arguments you've brought for it are at best half true and I hope readers don't see this and think any of these problems are unsolvable (or indeed, haven't already been solved)
[0] https://tech.moverio.epson.com/en/bt-300/ https://tech.moverio.epson.com/en/bt-300/
[1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7523376/ http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7523376/
- sillysaurus3 9y agoHere's [1] minus the paywall: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.sci-hub.cc/document/7523376/ http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.sci-hub.cc/document/7523376/
- guycook 9y agoWhilst I am certainly supportive of open access science in general, and in the case of my own writing am glad to see it reach a wider audience, I'm surprised by the brazenness of linking to a pirated article whilst in discussion with its author. I don't know whether to be offended or impressed
- rspeer 9y agoDo you see a reason that, as an author, you wouldn't want your article to be pirated as widely as possible? You get no actual benefit from IEEE making money off of your article, right?
- hemmer 9y agoThis is speculation, but perhaps there's a game-theory issue here. If IEEE loses money by people pirating (and you can apply the usual counter-arguments about whether the pirateer would have gone on to purchase it anyway) rather than paying then publishing costs increase to cover that loss, and therefore hurting the authors who must cover that increase in future if they want to publish in the journal again. A better situation is where the preprint or open access version is available.
- klibertp 9y ago> then publishing costs increase to cover that loss, and therefore hurting the authors who must cover that increase in future WHAT?! Does that mean it's the authors who pay publishers to get their work published? Is that really true? And then publishers also charge readers for what they were paid to publish in the first place? If so then... I don't even... :)
- mmierz 9y agoYes, this is actually how scientific publishing works.
- sillysaurus3 9y agoI think the university insulates the author from the costs you mention. This also assumes that the market for articles is fair and rational, when it's anything but.
- klibertp 9y agoI know next to nothing about the process of writing and publishing scientific papers, so forgive me if the question is stupid, but: what difference it makes for you personally, as an author and researcher, whether people access your work via a paywall or not?