scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> But there are two big downsides IMHO. First and most importantly the
> image resolution is absolutely atrocious. I'm only used to 1680x1050
> monitors at home, but this is like going back to 320x240 days.

Wait a minute... are the graphics all red, and does the headset look like this?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Virtual-Boy-wController.jpg

XD

Post a reply to this message

>> But there are two big downsides IMHO. First and most importantly the
>> image resolution is absolutely atrocious. I'm only used to 1680x1050
>> monitors at home, but this is like going back to 320x240 days.
>
> Wait a minute... are the graphics all red, and does the headset look like this?
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Virtual-Boy-wController.jpg

Damn I've been had - I thought I had a loose connection on the green and 
blue signals! But seriously the resolution in your central field of view 
is likely similar in that device...

I think I remember reading that you need something along the lines of a 
500 Mpixel display (about 30000x15000 pixels) per eye in order to allow 
you to look in any direction and not see any pixellation. Of course you 
could use advanced techniques to track your pupil and only render in 
high detail the bit you are looking at, but you'd still need a display 
that physically has that much resolution. Mmmmm 2x500MP@90Hz :-)

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >> But there are two big downsides IMHO. First and most importantly the
> >> image resolution is absolutely atrocious. I'm only used to 1680x1050
> >> monitors at home, but this is like going back to 320x240 days.
> >
> > Wait a minute... are the graphics all red, and does the headset look like this?
> > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Virtual-Boy-wController.jpg
>
> Damn I've been had - I thought I had a loose connection on the green and
> blue signals! But seriously the resolution in your central field of view
> is likely similar in that device...
>
> I think I remember reading that you need something along the lines of a
> 500 Mpixel display (about 30000x15000 pixels) per eye in order to allow
> you to look in any direction and not see any pixellation. Of course you
> could use advanced techniques to track your pupil and only render in
> high detail the bit you are looking at, but you'd still need a display
> that physically has that much resolution. Mmmmm 2x500MP@90Hz :-)

I'm not up-to-date on the latest technology, but somehow I don't think that'll
be happening for a while.

At least what you have now is a step up from crossing your eyes at the monitor
:)

Post a reply to this message

On 9/3/2015 2:39 PM, scott wrote:
> I got an Oculus Rift DK2 yesterday :-)

I am holding off until the consumer version is released. The resolution 
being the main consideration. I bought a fifteen quid Google cardboard 
just to try out VR. My Galaxy S2 has a 480 x 800 resolution and gave me 
a screen door effect but it was usable in the demos I downloaded. And 
gave me the confidence to want to use it for real.
I am really champing at the bit to use it with Elite.
Are you using any voice control to access your unseen keyboard?
I've set up Voice Attack even though I get the Scottish Lift effect. It 
is workable. Enhanced by using a voice pack from Brian Blessed.




-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'good, show the buggers what for.wav.dat' (298 KB)

> I am holding off until the consumer version is released. The resolution
> being the main consideration.

The consumer version is going to be 2160x1200, compared to the DK2 which 
is 1920x1080. I don't think there will be that much difference. 
Definitely try before you buy.

> I bought a fifteen quid Google cardboard
> just to try out VR. My Galaxy S2 has a 480 x 800 resolution and gave me
> a screen door effect but it was usable in the demos I downloaded. And
> gave me the confidence to want to use it for real.
> I am really champing at the bit to use it with Elite.

I guess it depends on the game you are playing, is it important if you 
miss some finer details? I found in iRacing that I couldn't read the 
text at all on the distance markers to the corners, kind of important if 
you rely on them to decide where to brake. And when the curb you are 
aiming for in the middle-distance is only 2 pixels wide it's difficult 
to be very precise with your line.

> Are you using any voice control to access your unseen keyboard?
> I've set up Voice Attack even though I get the Scottish Lift effect. It
> is workable. Enhanced by using a voice pack from Brian Blessed.

I don't use the keyboard whilst racing, I've got all the buttons on the 
wheel mapped to do whatever I need during a race, and they're fine to 
use by feel alone.

Post a reply to this message

Am 09.09.2015 um 15:55 schrieb scott:
>> I am holding off until the consumer version is released. The resolution
>> being the main consideration.
> 
> The consumer version is going to be 2160x1200, compared to the DK2 which
> is 1920x1080. I don't think there will be that much difference.
> Definitely try before you buy.

Just read a review of some newer prototype, saying that they've
significantly reduced the "flyscreen" effect compared to DK2.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> But there are two big downsides IMHO. First and most importantly the 
> image resolution is absolutely atrocious. I'm only used to 1680x1050 
> monitors at home, but this is like going back to 320x240 days. I know 
> they're using a 1920x1080 panel under the hood, but this is shared 
> between two eyes and it's not used all the way to the edges.

I don't really understand how 1920x1080 (or even 960x1080) can look
like 320x240. That would be like 20% of the vertical resolution.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 9/9/2015 2:55 PM, scott wrote:
>> I am holding off until the consumer version is released. The resolution
>> being the main consideration.
>
> The consumer version is going to be 2160x1200, compared to the DK2 which
> is 1920x1080. I don't think there will be that much difference.
> Definitely try before you buy.
>

If that is possible then I certainly would.


>
> I guess it depends on the game you are playing, is it important if you
> miss some finer details? I found in iRacing that I couldn't read the
> text at all on the distance markers to the corners, kind of important if
> you rely on them to decide where to brake. And when the curb you are
> aiming for in the middle-distance is only 2 pixels wide it's difficult
> to be very precise with your line.
>

I can understand that might be a problem.

There were complaints in Elite that text was hard to read but by 
changing the colour scheme it was much improved. Also using a reshader 
like SweetFx helps.

>
> I don't use the keyboard whilst racing, I've got all the buttons on the
> wheel mapped to do whatever I need during a race, and they're fine to
> use by feel alone.
>

That is good. I thought that in racing cars there would be levers to 
pull, fuel levels and suspension to balance etc.
In Elite I have almost all the keys bound to commands.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 09.09.2015 um 18:09 schrieb Warp:
> scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
>> But there are two big downsides IMHO. First and most importantly the 
>> image resolution is absolutely atrocious. I'm only used to 1680x1050 
>> monitors at home, but this is like going back to 320x240 days. I know 
>> they're using a 1920x1080 panel under the hood, but this is shared 
>> between two eyes and it's not used all the way to the edges.
> 
> I don't really understand how 1920x1080 (or even 960x1080) can look
> like 320x240. That would be like 20% of the vertical resolution.

You /are/ aware that the Oculus Rift DK2 has roundabout 90 degrees
vertical field of view, for a virtual height-to-central-distance ratio
of 2:1, while your average desktop display might sit there at some 1:2
or even 1:2.5?

Post a reply to this message

>> The consumer version is going to be 2160x1200, compared to the DK2 which
>> is 1920x1080. I don't think there will be that much difference.
>> Definitely try before you buy.
>
> Just read a review of some newer prototype, saying that they've
> significantly reduced the "flyscreen" effect compared to DK2.

Yes I read something similar, that it might appear better than the 
slight increase in resolution would otherwise indicate.

Post a reply to this message