wow..thats actually impressive. Looking forward to see what can be done with it for gaming. (and yes im glad i own a DSi too)
"Tell me why does it have to be so hard
to let go when it?s your final day
...When death is on it's way"
tarheel91 said:
No, sorry. That doesn't take the person's position into consideration. If I'm laying down and I have the DS above me, that should show the same thing as sitting and having the DS horizontally in front of me. You can't do that with just the angle of the DS (or tilt on a Wiimote). What's critical here is the angle between the viewer and the DS. You can only calculate that if you know the position of the viewer, and that requires a camera. Just because it's not stereoscopic doesn't make it not 3D. Stereoscopy uses 2 images to create the sensation of depth. This is using rotation to create the same sensation. It's a 3D image/room (in the sense of SM64 3D) no matter what you think, though. In order for the screen to show it correctly, it has to be able to rotate it like it's a 3D environment. |
It's a clever use of the front camera. I've seen this used on mobiles with the back one, and the results are poor to say the least, but in this head tracking is doing a good job.
About your stereoscopy comment, made me think, why haven't there been any stereoscopy games using the dual screens? Maybe it's because they is an added difficulty by having no input method available? Though they could use the Dpad like in this game and one of the shoulder buttons. EDIT: Arghh, ok... Not everyone can join two images on the fly, so that could be the problem.
| Snesboy said: I don't see how this uses the camera. |
I think the camera looks for your face, then it shows the 3D perspective from your point of view.
shams said:
Fair enough, good point actually. But if you had a calibration system, it should work on anything with an accelerometer (then again, I don't know exactly how the accelerometer in the iPhone works, which axis it supports, etc). I agree that its stereoscopy, and simulates 3D - but its still different from what people consider "3D" these days (which is all about providing slightly different images to each eye). |
Calibration could work, but you'd have to recalibrate every time you changed position, which would get annoying. Plus, you couldn't move your head to change the image, only move/rotate the DS.
I think I need to clarify about stereoscopy a bit more, though. Stereoscopy is what people consider "3D" these days. Stereoscopy is overlaying 2 different images and using something (e.g. glasses) to send one to each eye. This is rotating the image and modifying it at the same time to give off that same sensation. This gif does the same thing. It slightly rotates the image and alters it so that it gives the image depth:
@TomaTito: That's a pretty good idea, but it forces you to hold the DS sideways, and I'd think you'd get a headache doing that for an extended period of time.
Looks cool...but can't see it being anything more than a gimmick unless it's used well - the techs been seen on the wii and PS3 before (tech demos).
Interested indeed...........
"The Common Cold Isn't So Common During The Cold"
@tarheel91: yeah, its essentially what parallax scrolling and other 2D tricks are about - you move multiple things in the same 2D frame at different rates, and it gives the impression of depth.
Your GIF shows it well, but its still not '3D' - as both eyes receive the same image each frame.
...
Interesting thought about using the DS to generate 2 different images - you could build some 'clip on' filter that the user sort of looks into, which would simulate 3D.
Now if they released a DS where each screen generated polarised images at different angles - and from memory LCDs always generate polarised light (so one of the screens may need to be at 90deg, and use a controller to flip the pixels?) - you could do it really easily. Any of those 3D glasses that work based on polarised images would do the trick (I think the cheap ones from the cinemas work like that, I'll have to check...).
But that *would* be interesting - and the DS would be almost perfect for it. You would have to hold it at a distance such that the images overlaid though - might be easier to add '3D' support to the screens themselves.
Gesta Non Verba
Nocturnal is helping companies get cheaper game ratings in Australia:
Wii code: 2263 4706 2910 1099
| shams said: @tarheel91: yeah, its essentially what parallax scrolling and other 2D tricks are about - you move multiple things in the same 2D frame at different rates, and it gives the impression of depth. Your GIF shows it well, but its still not '3D' - as both eyes receive the same image each frame. ... Interesting thought about using the DS to generate 2 different images - you could build some 'clip on' filter that the user sort of looks into, which would simulate 3D. Now if they released a DS where each screen generated polarised images at different angles - and from memory LCDs always generate polarised light (so one of the screens may need to be at 90deg, and use a controller to flip the pixels?) - you could do it really easily. Any of those 3D glasses that work based on polarised images would do the trick (I think the cheap ones from the cinemas work like that, I'll have to check...). But that *would* be interesting - and the DS would be almost perfect for it. You would have to hold it at a distance such that the images overlaid though - might be easier to add '3D' support to the screens themselves. |
Stereoscopy =/= 3D. Neither methord actually generates anything that is actually 3D. It's all on a 2D screen. At the same time, all of it is 3D in the sense that each point has an x, a y, and a z coordinate. Stereoscopy and this are just two ways to produce the same illusion.
@tarheel91: "3D" being what we perceive as 3D, using our eyes. Consider each eye to be a camera, and then the brain processes the differences in the 2D images - and deduces depth and distance from that.
I guess its best illustrated with a non-changing image: the moving tricks don't work, and you get a single flat image that is perceived as 2D. With one image per eye, the brain can still perceive this as a 3D scene with depth.
But anyway... the OP is cool, and should get people interested.
Gesta Non Verba
Nocturnal is helping companies get cheaper game ratings in Australia:
Wii code: 2263 4706 2910 1099
| shams said: @tarheel91: "3D" being what we perceive as 3D, using our eyes. Consider each eye to be a camera, and then the brain processes the differences in the 2D images - and deduces depth and distance from that. I guess its best illustrated with a non-changing image: the moving tricks don't work, and you get a single flat image that is perceived as 2D. With one image per eye, the brain can still perceive this as a 3D scene with depth. But anyway... the OP is cool, and should get people interested. |
But our eyes also calculate depth using rotation. I know that for a fact, but even if I didn't, that optical illusion wouldn't work unless it did. What makes an image 3D is the sensation of depth and nothing else. As soon as the rotation is performed, it remains 3D even if it's not moving. This is because our brain notes the image as 3D and we see it as such as a result. That's why the image in the DS screen still looks 3D even when it stops moving. It's similar to the way our brain will continue patterns through our blind spot.
Essay Pro
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
