By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian on 01 November 2010
Edit Thread
youarebadatgames said:
theprof00 said:

you've just described a depth camera and its potential usefulness.

Not lightspace. Lightspace is the tech demo using 3d depth cameras ALONG WITH projectors, to "CREATE AN INTERACTIVE ENVIRONMENT". It's about creating, not about input, and it's not simply about 3d cameras which we've had for years now.

If all you wanted to do was say 3d cameras are exciting then fair enough.

If you wanted to prove to me how lightspace was a useful concept, you have not done so.


Having a 3d camera is one thing, figuring out useful things to do with that data is something else.  Gesture interpretation and human interaction with the environment is the novel part of the demonstration.  The value in this is it shows any surface or volume can be interactive, and is much more cost effective than the other options.  It requires no gloves or extra accessories and is much more robust than anything that would only use a regular camera.

It is very much about input and natural human/machine interaction.  You can't even define the concept, so of course you don't think it's useful.  But everyone else can see that having a computer track your every move and react to anything that is controllable is useful.  The projector is just a way to define and show users the interface options and provide feedback, it's not really the real advanced part of it.

I'm never going to convince you it's useful because you simply don't understand it.  So far your responses have proven to me that you don't even have a cursory understanding of the field because you can't tell me what the researchers have done that hasn't been done before.  Let's just say that the consensus from the people that matter is this demonstration shows a lot of interesting research principles with lots of possible applications in information manipulation and dynamic man/machine interaction, and you can continue being ignorant all day.


Just give it up, the guy is clueless.  If he doesn't see how this technology bridges the gap between Natural Human Interface then you are wasting a lot of text.  theprof00 is way to concerned about the hardware to understand the concepts and problems solved with this tech.  Commercially the tech is probably useless for consumers but if only concentrate on the consumer market then you miss the boat.


I guss the question for theprof00 would be why you think the tech is useless, then everyone can see how narrowminded you are and totally dismiss any more statements.